Search

Objective: This systematic review described the effect of interventions aimed at helping Healthcare Professionals refer high-risk individuals for lung cancer screening. Primary outcomes included: lung cancer detection, screening for lung cancer, lung cancer treatments received and lung cancer mortality. Healthcare professionals' knowledge and awareness of lung cancer screening served as secondary outcomes., Methods: Experimental studies published between January 2016 and 2021 were included. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycARTICLES, PsycInfo and Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and the level of evidence was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network grading system., Results: Nine studies were included. Nurse navigation, electronic prompts for lung cancer screening and shared decision-making helped improve patient outcomes. Specialist screenings yielded more significant incidental findings and a higher percentage of Lung-RADS 1 results (i.e. no nodules/definitely benign nodules), while Primary Care Physician screenings were associated with higher numbers of Lung-RADS 2 results (i.e. benign nodules with a very low likelihood to becoming malignant). An increase in Healthcare Professionals' knowledge and awareness of lung cancer screening was achieved using group-based learning compared to lecture-based education delivery., Conclusions: The effectiveness of Nurse navigation is evident, as are the benefits of adequate training, shared decision-making, as well as a structured, clear and well-understood referral processes supported by the use of electronic system-incorporated prompts., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Abstract: Recent research indicates that parents of children with craniosynostosis may be at risk of emotional distress. Yet, parents may not be accessing the support they need to cope with common challenges. The aim of this project was to develop a research-informed booklet to promote psychological health in new families, and to assess acceptability of the booklet within the craniosynostosis community. The first draft was designed in close collaboration with leading UK charity Headlines Craniofacial Support 5 parent representatives, and 3 specialist clinical psychologists via online focus groups. The draft booklet, attached to an online acceptability survey, was distributed to a broader group of parents and multidisciplinary specialists working in craniofacial teams in England for feedback. A total of 44 complete responses to the online acceptability survey were received. Acceptability (measured by the number of respondents who would recommend the booklet) was 100%. All respondents reported they "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the UK-wide distribution of the booklet. Evidence for psychological intervention in the craniofacial field remains scarce, and specialist teams may be under-resourced to effectively screen and support parents. It is hoped this booklet will begin to address the gap in psychological support for new families affected by craniosynostosis., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.)

Objective: To review the outcomes of cochlear implants (CI) in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) in a large cohort, and identify factors associated with poor hearing benefit., Study Design: Fifteen-year retrospective national observational case series., Setting: United Kingdom regional NF2 multidisciplinary teams., Patients: Consecutive patients with NF2 receiving a CI., Interventions: CI for hearing rehabilitation., Main Outcome Measures: 1) Audiometric performance at 9 to 12 months after implantation using City University of New York (CUNY) sentence recognition score, and Bamford- Kowal-Bench (BKB) word recognition score in quiet (BKBq), and in noise (BKBn). 2) CI use at most recent review., Results: Sixty four consecutive patients, median age 43 years, were included. Nine to 12 months mean audiometric scores were: CUNY 60.9%, BKBq 45.8%, BKBn 41.6%. There was no difference in audiometric outcomes between VS treatment modalities. At most recent review (median 3.6 years from implantation), 84.9% with device in situ/available data were full or part-time users. Between 9 and 12 months and most recent review there was an interval reduction in mean audiometric scores: CUNY -12.9%, BKBq -3.3%, BKBn -4.9%. Larger tumor size and shorter duration of profound hearing loss were the only variables associated with poorer audiometric scores. Tumor growth at the time of surgery was the only variable associated with CI non-use. Individual patient response was highly variable., Conclusions: CI can provide significant and sustained auditory benefits to patients with NF2 independent of tumor treatment modality, with the majority of those implanted becoming at least part-time users. Larger datasets are required to reliably assess the role of independent variables., Competing Interests: The authors disclose no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.)

Objective: Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (eABRs) can be recorded before cochlear implant (CI) surgery to verify auditory nerve function, and is particularly helpful in to assess the function of the auditory nerve in cases of auditory nerve hypoplasia. This is the first study to compare three preimplant eABRs recording techniques: 1) standard extracochlear, 2) novel intracochlear, and 3) conventional intracochlear with the CI., Study Design: A within-participants design was used where eABRs were sequentially measured during CI surgery using three methods with stimulation from: 1) an extracochlear electrode placed at the round window niche, 2) two different electrodes on a recently developed Intracochlear Test Array (ITA), and 3) two different electrodes on a CI electrode array., Setting: New adults implantees (n = 16) were recruited through the Manchester Auditory Implant Centre and eABR measurements were made in theater at the time of CI surgery., Patients: All participants met the clinical criteria for cochlear implantation. Only participants with radiologically normal auditory nerves were recruited to the study. All participants were surgically listed for either a MED-EL Synchrony implant or a Cochlear Nucleus Profile implant, per standard practice in the implant centre., Outcome Measures: Primary outcome measures were: 1) charge (μC) required to elicit a threshold response, and 2) latencies (ms) in the threshold waveforms. Secondary outcome measures were: 1) morphologies of responses at suprathreshold stimulation levels and 2) wave V growth patterns., Results: eABRs were successfully measured from 15 participants. In terms of primary outcome measures, the charge required to elicit a response using the extracochlear electrode (median = 0.075 μC) was approximately six times larger than all other electrodes and the latency of wave V was approximately 0.5 ms longer when using the extracochlear electrode (mean = 5.1 ms). In terms of secondary outcomes, there were some minor quantitative differences in responses between extracochlear and intracochlear stimulation; in particular, ITA responses were highly variable in quality. The ITA responses were rated poor quality in 33% of recordings and in two instances did not allow for data collection. When not disrupted by open circuits, the median ITA response contained one more waveform than the median extracochlear response., Conclusions: In this first study comparing intracochlear and extracochlear stimulation, the results show that both can be used to produce an eABR that is representative of the one elicited by the CI. In the majority of cases, extracochlear stimulation was the preferred approach for preimplant auditory nerve function testing because of consistency, recordings that could be analyzed, and because extracochlear placement of the electrode does not require a cochleostomy to insert an electrode.

Objective: Hearing loss resulting from bilateral vestibular schwannomas (VSs) has a significant effect on the quality of life of patients with neurofibromatosis Type 2 (NF2). A national consensus protocol was produced in England as a guide for cochlear implantation (CI) and auditory brainstem implantation (ABI) in these patients., Study Design: Consensus statement., Setting: English NF2 Service., Participants: Clinicians from all 4 lead NF2 units in England., Main Outcome Measures: A protocol for the assessment, insertion and rehabilitation of CI and ABI in NF2 patients., Results: Patients should undergo more detailed hearing assessment once their maximum aided speech discrimination score falls below 50% in the better hearing ear. Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentence testing scores below 50% should trigger assessment for auditory implantation, as recommended by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence guidelines on CI. Where this occurs in patients with bilateral stable VS or a unilateral stable VS where the contralateral cochlear nerve was lost at previous surgery, CI should be considered. Where VS surgery is planned, CI should be considered where cochlear nerve preservation is thought possible, otherwise an ABI should be considered. Intraoperative testing using electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses or cochlear nerve action potentials may be used to determine whether a CI or ABI is inserted., Conclusion: The NF2 centers in England agreed on this protocol. Multisite, prospective assessments of standardized protocols for auditory implantation in NF2 provide an essential model for evaluating candidacy and outcomes in this challenging patient population.

We present a female infant with a combination of finger duplication, amniotic band-like constrictions and extensive syndactyly affecting all four limbs with skin tags. No facial dysmorphic features nor associated malformations were present. Growth and development was normal and there was no family history of congenital abnormalities. The presence of constriction band-like regions on the hands and absent or hypoplastic digits suggests the amniotic deformity, adhesion and mutilation complex. Mutations in the human homologue of the mouse gene disorganization gene may also be the mechanism for the combination of constriction/duplication abnormalities with distant skin tags seen in this patient.

Objective: To evaluate the speech perception benefits of bilateral implantation for subjects who already have one implant., Study Design: Repeated measures., Patients: Thirty adult cochlear implant users who received their second implant from 1 to 7 years with a mean of 3 years after their first device. Ages ranged from 29 to 82 years with a mean of 57 years., Setting: Tertiary referral centers across the United Kingdom., Main Outcome Measures: Monosyllabic consonant-nucleus-consonant words and City University of New York sentences in quiet with coincident speech and noise and with the noise spatially separated from the speech by +/-90 degrees ., Results: At 9 months, results showed the second ear in noise was 13.9 +/- 5.9% worse than the first ear (p < 0.001); a significant binaural advantage of 12.6 +/- 5.4% (p < 0.001) over the first ear alone for speech and noise from the front; a 21 +/- 6% (p < 0.001) binaural advantage over the first ear alone when noise was ipsilateral to the first ear; no binaural advantage when noise was contralateral to the first ear., Conclusions: There is a significant bilateral advantage of adding a second ear for this group. We were unable to predict when the second ear would be the better performing ear, and by implanting both ears, we guarantee implanting the better ear. Sequential implantation with long delays between ears has resulted in poor second ear performance for some subjects and has limited the degree of bilateral benefit that can be obtained by these users. The dual microphone does not provide equivalent benefit to bilateral implants.

Objective: To quantify binaural advantage for auditory localization in the horizontal plane by bilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients. Also, to determine whether the use of dual microphones with one implant improves localization., Methods: Twenty subjects from the UK multicenter trial of bilateral cochlear implantation with Nucleus 24 K/M device were recruited. Sound localization was assessed in an anechoic room with an 11-loudspeaker array under four test conditions: right CI, left CI, binaural CI, and dual microphone. Two runs were undertaken for each of five stimuli (speech, tones, noise, transients, and reverberant speech). Order of conditions was counterbalanced across subjects., Results: Mean localization error with bilateral implants was 24 degrees compared with 67 degrees for monaural implant and dual microphone conditions (chance performance is 65 degrees). Normal controls average 2 to 3 degrees in similar conditions. Binaural performance was significantly better than monaural performance for all subjects, for all stimulus types, and for different sound sources. Only small differences in performance with different stimuli were observed., Conclusions: Bilateral cochlear implantation with the Nucleus 24 device provides marked improvement in horizontal plane localization abilities compared with unilateral CI use for a range of stimuli having different spectral and temporal characteristics. Benefit was obtained by all subjects, for all stimulus types, and for all sound directions. However, binaural performance was still worse than that obtained by normal hearing listeners and hearing aid users with the same methodology. Monaural localization performance was at chance. There is no benefit for localization with dual microphones.

Objective: To explore the dilemma faced by neurotologists confronted with the patient who develops a vestibular schwannoma in the only hearing ear, the other having been deaf from birth, and to consider the choice between auditory rehabilitation using a cochlear implant (CI) on the congenitally deaf side and an auditory brainstem implant (ABI) on the tumor side., Study Design: A record review of two patients born deaf in one ear and who developed a vestibular schwannoma in the contra lateral ear, who then received a CI in the congenitally deaf ear., Setting: Tertiary referral center with special experience in vestibular schwannoma surgery, neurofibromatosis type 2 management, and cochlear implantation., Results: Neither patient was a good CI user. At 1 year postimplant, they both scored 0% on abbreviated words and 0% and 7%, respectively, on Bench Kowal Bamford sentences. They scored 54% and 57%, respectively, on City University of New York sentences with lip-reading, and both had fair access to environmental sound scoring at 45% each., Conclusions: The results from cochlear implantation in the congenitally deaf ear in these patients were poor and suggest that stimulus deprivation in the early stages of the maturation of the auditory pathways is important even for a unilateral hearing loss. Unfortunately, the factors that predict a good ABI result are not known. In these circumstances, the authors advocate the insertion of an ABI at the time of tumor removal, retaining the option of CI in the congenitally deaf ear in the event of a poor outcome with the ABI.