Search

BackgroundInternet-based programs can help provide accessible and inexpensive behavioral health care to those in need; however, the evaluation of these interventions has been mostly limited to controlled trials. Data regarding patterns of use and effectiveness of self-referred, open-access online interventions are lacking. We evaluated an online-based treatment designed to address stress, depression, and conflict management, the Dartmouth PATH Program, in a freely available and self-guided format during the COVID-19 pandemic. ObjectiveThe primary aim is to determine users’ levels of stress and depression, and the nature of problems and triggers they reported during the COVID-19 pandemic. A secondary objective is to assess the acceptability and usability of the PATH content and determine whether such a program would be useful as a stand-alone open-access resource. The final objective is understanding the high dropout rates associated with online behavioral programs by contrasting the use pattern and program efficacy of individuals who completed session one and did not return to the program with those who came back to complete more sessions. MethodsCumulative anonymous data from 562 individuals were analyzed. Stress triggers, stress responses, and reported problems were analyzed using qualitative analysis techniques. Scores on usability and acceptability questionnaires were evaluated using the sign test and Wilcoxon signed rank test. Mixed-effects linear modeling was used to evaluate changes in stress and depression over time. ResultsA total of 2484 users registered from April through October 2020, most of whom created an account without initiating a module. A total of 562 individuals started the program and were considered in the data analysis. The most common stress triggers individuals reported involved either conflicts with family or spouses and work or workload. The most common problems addressed in the mood module were worry, anxiousness, or stress and difficulty concentrating or procrastination. The attrition rate was high with 13% (21/156) completing the conflict module, 17% (50/289) completing session one of the mood module, and 14% (16/117) completing session one of the stress module. Usability and acceptability scores for the mood and stress modules were significantly better than average. In those who returned to complete sessions, symptoms of stress showed a significant improvement over time (P=.03), and there was a significant decrease in depressive symptoms over all time points (P=.01). Depression severity decreased on average by 20% (SD 35.2%; P=.60) between sessions one and two. ConclusionsConflicts with others, worry, and difficulty concentrating were some of the most common problems people used the programs to address. Individuals who completed the modules indicated improvements in self-reported stress and depression symptoms. Users also found the modules to be effective and rated the program highly for usability and acceptability. Nevertheless, the attrition rate was very high, as has been found with other freely available online-based interventions. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02726061; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02726061

BackgroundHyperbaric oxygen (HBO2)—oxygen at pressures higher than atmospheric—is approved for 14 indications by the Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society. HBO2’s main effect is to increase oxygen content in plasma and body tissues, which can counteract hypoxia or ischemia. Laboratory studies show that HBO2 has effects beyond relieving hypoxia (eg, promoting angiogenesis in irradiated tissue, anti-inflammatory effects, radiosensitization of tumors, hypoxia preconditioning, and fungal growth inhibition) and has potential to treat conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease and pyoderma gangrenosum. Lack of consistently collected outcome data on a large cohort of individuals receiving HBO2 therapy limits its use for both established and new indications. A course of therapy often involves 30-40 visits to a hyperbaric chamber, so the number of patients seen at any given center is constrained by chamber capacity. As a result, published HBO2 outcome data tend to be from small case series because few patients with a particular condition are treated at a given center. To solve this problem, a registry that collects and pools data systematically from multiple institutions has been established. ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to collect consistent outcome data across multiple hyperbaric centers to assess treatment effectiveness and establish a research consortium. MethodsA consortium of hyperbaric centers who have agreed to collect consistent outcome data on all patients seen has been assembled. Data are collected at each participating center using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), a web-based, data collection system used frequently for research. Standard outcome measures have been defined for each condition, which are programmed into the REDCap data collection templates. Governance is through a consortium agreement that defines data security, data sharing, publications, liability, and other issues. Centers obtain Institutional Review Board (IRB) and ethics approval to participate, either from their own institutions or by relying on the IRB at the coordinating center at Dartmouth College. Dissemination will occur through a yearly report and by publications based on the data in the registry. ResultsEarly results from some common indications show significant pretreatment to posttreatment changes. Additional indications and outcome measures are being added using the procedures outlined in the consortium agreement. ConclusionsThe registry collects consistent outcome information for a therapy that needs further study and a stronger evidence base. It also overcomes the challenge of collecting data from an adequate number of patients for both established and emerging indications by combining data collection from multiple centers. The data entry requirements should be within the capabilities of existing staff at any given hyperbaric center. By using REDCap, the registry can be expanded to include detailed information on particular indications and long-term follow-up on selected patients without significantly increasing the basic data entry requirements. Through the registry, a network of enrolled hyperbaric centers has been established that provides the basis for a clinical trial network. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/18857

Automated threshold audiometry (ATA) could increase access to paediatric hearing assessment in low- and middle-income countries, but few studies have evaluated test-retest repeatability of ATA in children. This study aims to analyse test-retest repeatability of ATA and to identify factors that affect the reliability of this method. ATA was performed twice in a cohort of Nicaraguan schoolchildren. During testing, the proportion of responses occurring in the absence of a stimulus was measured by calculating a stimulus response false positive rate (SRFP). Absolute test-retest repeatability was determined between the two trials, as well as the impact of age, gender, ambient noise, head circumference, and SRFP on these results. 807 children were randomly selected from 35 schools in northern Nicaragua. Across all frequencies, the absolute value of the difference between measurements was 5.5 ± 7.8 dB. 89.6% of test-retest differences were within 10 dB. Intra-class correlation coefficients between the two measurements showed that lower SRFP was associated with improved repeatability. No effect of age, gender, or ambient noise was found. ATA produced moderate test-retest repeatability in Nicaraguan schoolchildren. Participant testing behaviours, such as delayed or otherwise inappropriate response patterns, significantly impacts the repeatability of these measurements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]