Changes in cognitive appraisal in a randomized controlled trial of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for patients with migraine.

OBJECTIVE: This study is a secondary analysis evaluating changes in cognitive fusion and pain catastrophizing over 8 weeks of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for migraine (MBCT-M) intervention versus waitlist/treatment as usual. BACKGROUND: Migraine is a common disabling neurological condition. MBCT-M combines elements of cognitive behavioral therapy with mindfulness-based approaches and has demonstrated efficacy in reducing migraine-related disability. METHODS: A total of 60 adults with migraine completed a 30-day run-in before randomization into a parallel design of either eight weekly individual MBCT-M sessions (n = 31) or waitlist/treatment as usual (n = 29): participants were followed for 1 month after. Participants completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) at Months 0, 1, 2, and 4. RESULTS: The PCS scores decreased more in the MBCT-M group (mean [SD] at baseline = 22.5 [9.6]; at Month 4 = 15.1 [8.8]) than in the waitlist/treatment as usual group (mean [SD] at baseline = 24.9 [9.0]; at Month 4 = 22.5 [10.4]) from Month 0 to 4 (ß = -7.24, p = 0.001, 95% confidence interval [CI] -11.39 to -3.09). The CFQ (mean [SD] baseline = 27.6 [8.0]; at Month 4 = 25.0 [8.0]) did not change significantly from Month 0 to 4 (ß = -1.2, p = 0.482, 95% CI -4.5 to 2.1). Parallel mediation analyses indicated that decreases in the PCS and CFQ together (ß = -6.1, SE = 2.5, 95% CI -11.6 to -1.8), and the PCS alone (ß = -4.8, SE = 2.04, 95% CI -9.1 to -1.1), mediated changes in headache disability in the MBCT-M treatment completer group (n = 19). CONCLUSION: In this study, pain catastrophizing showed strong promise as a potential mechanism of MBCT-M. Future research should continue to explore cognitive appraisal changes in mindfulness-based interventions.

Readability, Content, and Quality of Online Patient Education Materials on Anesthesia and Neurotoxicity in the Pediatric Population.

OBJECTIVE: Internet-based patient education materials (PEMs) are often above the recommended sixth grade reading level recommended by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In 2016 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a warning statement against use of general anesthetic drugs in children and pregnant women due to concerns about neurotoxicity. The aim of this study is to evaluate readability, content, and quality of Internet-based PEMs on anesthesia in the pediatric population and neurotoxicity. STUDY DESIGN: The websites of U.S. medical centers with pediatric anesthesiology fellowship programs were searched for PEMs pertaining to pediatric anesthesia and neurotoxicity. Readability was assessed. PEM content was evaluated using matrices specific to pediatric anesthesia and neurotoxicity. PEM quality was assessed with the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool for Print. A one-sample t-test was used to compare the readability of the PEMs to the recommended sixth grade reading level. RESULTS: We identified 27 PEMs pertaining to pediatric anesthesia and eight to neurotoxicity. Mean readability of all PEMs was greater than a sixth grade reading (p <0.001). While only 13% of PEMs on anesthesia for pediatric patient mentioned the FDA warning, 100% of the neurotoxicity materials did. PEMs had good understandability (83%) and poor actionability (60%). CONCLUSION: The readability, content, and quality of PEMs are poor and should be improved to help parents and guardians make informed decisions about their children's health care. KEY POINTS: · The FDA issued a warning statement against the use of general anesthetic drugs in children and pregnant women.. · Readability, content, and quality of Internet-based patient education materials on the topic of neurotoxicity are poor.. · Improving the readability, content, and quality of PEMs could aid parents in making important health care decisions..

Implementation of a risk-stratified approach to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in an institution with high baseline rates of prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although a risk-adjusted approach to preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is generally recommended, the successful implementation of such practice without mandated protocols remains elusive. To date, such a strategy has never been adapted to curb high baseline rates of prophylaxis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted an observational study on a cohort of patients undergoing elective surgery before and after the implementation of a quality improvement initiative including a risk-stratified approach to prevent PONV. The primary outcome was the number of prophylactic interventions administered. Secondary outcome included the repetition of ineffective medications and the need for rescue medication in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). RESULTS: A total of 636 patients were included; 325 patients during the control period and 311 after the intervention. The educational program failed to reduce the amount of prophylactic antiemetics administered (2.0 vs. 2.6, P < 0.001) and the repeat administration of ineffective medications for rescue (16% vs. 20%, P = 0.15). More patients in the intervention group required rescue medication compared to the control group (16.9% vs. 9.7%; P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Implementation of best practices to combat PONV remains elusive. Our results indicate that difficulties in changing provider behavior also apply to institutions with high prophylactic antiemetic administration rates.

Readability, content, and quality of COVID-19 patient education materials from academic medical centers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has spread rapidly resulted in a global pandemic and public health crisis. The internet is a frequently used resource for providing patient education materials (PEMs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the readability, content, and quality of web-based PEMs on COVID-19 from US academic medical centers. METHODS: The names of US medical schools were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges website (n = 145). Institutional, hospital, and heath encyclopedia websites associated with each schools' medical center were identified using Google. Readability of COVID-19 PEMs was calculated using three validated indices: (1) Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level, (2) Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, and (3) Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook. Content was evaluated using a scoring matrix based on materials available on the Center for Disease Control website. The Patient Education Material Assessment Tool for Print (PEMAT-P) was used to assess usability and actionability. RESULTS: A total of 141 (97%) PEMs met inclusion criteria and were analyzed for readability, content, and quality. The mean readability was above the recommended sixth grade reading level (P < .001). Content was variable across PEMs. The PEMAT-P scores reflected good understandability with a median score of 83% (IQR 75%-87%), while actionability was poor with a median score of 41% (IQR 40%-60%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite availability of web-based PEMs for COVID-19, the readability was significantly higher than the National Institute of Health and US Department of Health and Human Services recommended sixth grade reading level and actionability of PEMs was low. It is critical to provide readable PEMs on COVID-19 to effectively disseminate accurate information and facilitate patients' understanding of the virus, how it spreads, and how to protect themselves.

Liver resection for metastatic disease prolongs survival in renal cell carcinoma: 12-year results from a retrospective comparative analysis.

UNLABELLED: The value of surgical resection of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) liver metastases still remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: Of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of liver resection by comparing patients who could have undergone metastasectomy due to limited disease, but refused surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-eight patients were identified with liver metastases and indication of surgery between 1995 and 2006. In 68 patients, liver resection was performed, 20 patients denied surgery and served as comparison group. Patients were followed for survival. RESULTS: Median age was 58. Median amount of liver metastases was 2 (range 1-30). Median follow-up was 26 months (range 1-187). In both groups, 79% received systemic therapy. The 5-year overall survival rate (OSR-5) after metastasectomy was 62.2% +/- 11.4% (SEM) with a median survival (MS) of 142 (95% confidence interval (CI) 115-169) months. OSR-5 in the control group was 29.3% +/- 22.0% (SEM) with a MS of 27 (95% CI 16-38) months (P = 0.003). MS was 155 (95% CI 133-175) months with metachronous metastases compared to 29 (95% CI 25-33) months in the comparison group (P = 0.001). Low-grade primary RCC had a MS of 155 (95% CI 123-187) months compared to 29 (95% CI 8-50) months without resection (P = 0.0036). High-grade RCC as well as patients with synchronous metastases did not benefit from surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Liver metastasectomy is an independent valuable tool in the treatment of metastatic RCC and significantly prolongs patient's survival, even if further systemic treatment is necessary. With the evidence given, patients may benefit from liver metastasis resection if technically feasible.