The Placebo Effect on Tinnitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the placebo effect in randomized clinical trials treating tinnitus with oral or intratympanic placebo treatment. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, PubMed, and Scopus were searched for articles from conception to October 2022. MESH and key terms such as "tinnitus," "placebo," and "medication" were used to find randomized, placebo-controlled trials. The search was limited to articles in English. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials with adult subjects evaluating tinnitus pretreatment and posttreatment with an oral or intratympanic medication versus a placebo arm were included. Crossover studies, studies involving middle/inner ear operations or devices, and studies that exclusively included nonidiopathic etiologies of tinnitus were excluded. Mean tinnitus symptom survey scores for the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Tinnitus Severity Index, Tinnitus Functional Index, Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire, and Visual Analog Scales for tinnitus Intensity/Loudness (VAS-L), Annoyance (VAS-An), and Awareness (VAS-Aw) were extracted for both placebo and experimental groups. RESULTS: 953 studies were screened with 23 studies being included in the final analysis. Meta-analysis of mean difference (MD) was calculated using RevMan 5.4. MD between pretreatment and posttreatment THI scores of the placebo arms was 5.6 (95% confidence interval, 3.3-8.0; p < 0.001). MD between pretreatment and posttreatment VAS scores of the placebo groups for Loudness, Annoyance, and Awareness were 0.8 (0.0 to 1.6, p = 0.05), 0.2 (-0.2 to 0.5, p = 0.34), and 0.3 (-0.0 to 0.7, p = 0.08), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Placebo treatment has shown effectiveness in improving patient-reported evaluations of tinnitus when using some standardized metrics such as THI and VAS-L; however, the improvement is not as substantial as nonplacebo treatment.

A Systematic Review of Pharyngeal High-Resolution Manometry Normative Data.

PURPOSE: The utilization of high-resolution pharyngeal manometry (HRPM) in the evaluation of pharyngeal dysphagia has been increasing; however, standardization of its use has lagged behind. Without standardization using normative values, it is difficult for clinicians to adopt this emerging technology into meaningful use. Our goal is to map and compare the published normative values for common HRPM metrics in order to help establish consensus reference values. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted on prospective and retrospective studies that included HRPM metrics, defined by an international working group consensus, in healthy adult populations. Data on the following variables were extracted when available: contractile integrals of the pharynx (PhCI), velopharynx, mesopharynx, and hypopharynx, as well as the upper esophageal sphincter (UES) integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), relaxation time (RT), maximum admittance, and hypopharyngeal intrabolus pressure. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included. Significant variation existed in the technique and equipment used to perform procedures between the different studies. Lower PhCIs and UES IRPs were seen in younger compared to older individuals. Higher UES RTs were found in individuals in the upright position compared to the supine position and in those using larger boluses sizes or smaller catheters. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the wide variety of protocols, catheter configurations, manufacturers, and software used in the existing literature, it is difficult to formulate consensus on HPRM normative values using pooled data. Prospective studies adhering to standardized HRPM protocols for specific catheter configurations and manufacturers with larger cohorts of normal individuals are necessary to establish proper reference values for HRPM metrics. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24843753.

The readability of online patient education materials on maxillomandibular advancement surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) is an effective surgical option for patients suffering from obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). As a relatively new treatment option, patients may turn to the Internet to learn more. However, online patient education materials (OPEMs) on MMA may be written at a higher literacy level than recommended for patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the readability of OPEMs on MMA. METHODS: A Google search of "maxillomandibular advancement" was performed, and the first 100 results were screened. Websites that met eligibility criteria were analyzed for their readability using the Automated Readability Index (ARI), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog (GF), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and compared to the recommended sixth-grade reading level using one-tailed t tests. Readability scores were compared based on the type of website, including hospitals/universities or physician clinics, using ANOVA tests. RESULTS: The mean (SD) for ARI, CLI, FKGL, GF, and SMOG was 11.91 (2.43), 13.42 (1.81), 11.91 (2.06), 14.32 (2.34), and 13.99 (1.56), respectively. All readability scores were significantly higher than a sixth-grade reading level (p < 0.001). After comparing readability scores between different website types (university/hospital, clinic, and other), there was no statistical difference found. CONCLUSIONS: The available OPEMs on MMA surgery for OSA are above the recommended sixth-grade reading level. Identifying and reducing the gap between the reading levels of OPEMs and the reading level of the patient are needed to encourage a more active role, informed decisions, and better patient satisfaction.

The Efficacy of Superior Laryngeal Nerve Block for Neurogenic Cough: A Placebo-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic cough is a common and debilitating problem. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of superior laryngeal nerve (SLN) block for neurogenic cough through a placebo-controlled, prospective trial. METHODS: Patients were recruited in an outpatient tertiary care center. Inclusion criteria included a history consistent with neurogenic cough and age ≥ 18. Exclusion criteria included patients with untreated other etiologies of chronic cough (i.e., uncontrolled reflux) and current neuromodulating medication use. Patients were randomized into the treatment (1-2 mL of a 1:1 triamcinolone 40 mg: 1% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrines) or placebo (saline) group and received two unilateral injections at approximately 2-week intervals. Outcomes were measured primarily by the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ) and a patient symptom log including a visual analog scale of cough severity. RESULTS: 17 patients completed the study, including 10 in the treatment group and seven in the placebo group. Eight (80%) patients in the treatment group reported improvement with at least one of the injections, whereas only 1 (14.3%) patient reported improvement in the placebo group (p < 0.0001). Average total LCQ scores increased in the treatment group from 10.09 to 13.15 (p = 0.03), with the most change occurring in the social domain. There was no statistically significant change in LCQ scores for the placebo group. There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: An SLN block is a safe and efficacious procedure for the treatment of neurogenic cough. Further studies are needed to optimize treatment protocol and assess long-term follow-up of patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Laryngoscope, 133:3068-3074, 2023.

The Impact of Cervical Spinal Disease on Pharyngeal Swallowing Function.

PURPOSE: Spinal pathology is very common with advancing age and can cause dysphagia; however, it is unclear how frequently these pathologies affect swallowing function. This study evaluates how cervical spinal pathology may impact swallowing function in dysphagic individuals observed during videofluoroscopic swallowing studies (VFSSs). METHOD: A retrospective case-control study was performed on 100 individuals with dysphagia as well as age-/gender-matched healthy controls (HCs) with available VFSS. Spinal anatomy of patients was classified into two predetermined categories, and a consensus decision of whether spinal pathology influenced swallowing physiology was made. Validated swallow metrics, including Modified Barium Swallow Impairment Profile (MBSImP) component scores, Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) maximum scores, and 10-item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) scores, were compared between the spine-associated dysphagia (SAD), non-SAD (NSAD), and HC groups using Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: Most patients with dysphagia had spinal pathology. Spinal pathology was judged to be the primary etiology of dysphagia in 16.9% of patients with abnormal spine pathology. Median EAT-10 scores were statistically different among the three groups, with the NSAD group scoring the highest and the HC group scoring the lowest. Similarly, median PAS scores were significantly different between dysphagic groups and HCs. Median MBSImP Oral Total scores were significantly different only between the NSAD group and HCs, whereas Pharyngeal Total score was not significantly different among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal pathology is commonly observed during VFSS and can contribute to dysphagia, resulting in worse swallowing-related outcomes when compared with HCs. Patients judged to have SAD tended to have better outcomes than patients with dysphagia from other etiologies, perhaps due to the progressive nature of spinal disease that allows for compensatory swallowing physiology over time.

Systematic review of cochlear implantation in patients with inner ear malformations.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of cochlear implantation in patients with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss due to inner ear malformations (IEMs) when compared to patients without IEMs. We discussed audiological outcomes such as open-set testing, closed-set testing, CAP score, and SIR score as well as postoperative outcomes such as cerebrospinal fluid gusher and incomplete insertion rate associated with cochlear implantation in individuals with IEMs. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases. REVIEW METHODS: After screening a total of 222 studies, twelve eligible original articles were included in the review to analyze the speech and hearing outcomes of implanted patients with IEMs. Five reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data. The "Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Cohort Studies" published by the CLARITY group was used to perform quality assessment on eligible studies. Systematic review registration number: CRD42021237489. RESULTS: IEMs are more likely to be associated with abnormal position of the facial nerve, raising the risk of intraoperative complications. These patients may benefit from cochlear implantation, but audiological outcomes may also be less favorable than in individuals without IEMs. Furthermore, due to the risk of cerebrospinal fluid gusher, incomplete insertion of electrodes, and postoperative facial nerve stimulation, surgeons can employ precautionary measures such as preoperative imaging and proper counseling. Postoperative imaging is suggested to be beneficial in ensuring proper electrode placement. CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implants (CIs) have the potential to provide auditory rehabilitation to individuals with IEMs. Precise classification of the malformation, preoperative imaging and anatomical mapping, appropriate electrode selection, intra-operative techniques, and postoperative imaging are recommended in this population.