Coblation versus BiZact extra-capsular tonsillectomy in adults: a randomized control trial.

INTRODUCTION: Tonsillectomy is a frequently performed otolaryngological procedure and is associated with significant postoperative pain and bleeding. A number of studies have investigated methods to reduce pain and bleeding. Coblation and BiZact devices have both been claimed to have favourable pain outcomes following tonsillectomy. This study was designed to investigate these two techniques in a direct comparison of postoperative pain and bleeding. METHODS: In this single blinded, randomized control trial, 61 patients were randomly assigned to undergo tonsillectomy with either the BiZact or Coblation device. Pain scores were collected for 14 days postoperatively using a Visual Analogue Score scale. Secondary outcome data was collected for duration of surgery, intra-operative bleeding, return to normal, and secondary bleeding rates. RESULTS: Coblation was found to have lower postoperative pain on day 1 (P < 0.05). BiZact was found to have lower postoperative pain on day 7 (P < 0.05) and day 11 (P < 0.05). Pain scores for other days were not significant. There was no significant difference in set-up time, procedural time and return to normal activities. The BiZact group had a longer time to achieve haemostasis (P < 0.001) and greater intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.01). There was a trend towards more significant secondary bleeding in the BiZact arm, however, this study was not adequately powered to assess this finding. CONCLUSION: Both Coblation and BiZact devices appear to provide a safe and effective method for tonsillectomy in adults. Reduced pain on day 1 may make Coblation more suitable for day-case surgery.

Customised acoustic therapy delivered through a web-based platform-An innovative approach to tinnitus treatment.

OBJECTIVES: Customised acoustic therapy aims to moderate the neural pathways implicated in the pathophysiology of tinnitus. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of customised acoustic therapy administered via a web-based treatment platform. DESIGN: Clinical trial with prospective recruitment. Fifty-eight participants underwent 6 weeks of customised acoustic therapy. SETTING: Treatment was delivered for 2 h each day using a smartphone, tablet or computer. Treatment was integrated into usual daily activities. PARTICIPANTS: Participants with subjective tinnitus were recruited through public and private otolaryngology clinics and electronic and print media. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: FiveQ, a novel 5 question tinnitus questionnaire, was measured at baseline and each week of treatment. Statistical analyses, including Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney and mixed linear regression, were used to assess treatment efficacy and identify factors associated with treatment response. RESULTS: 39/58 participants (67.2%) had an improvement in symptom severity scores, 4 had no change (6.9%) and 15 had a decline from baseline (25.9%). Mean FiveQ scores improved by 22.9% from 40.8 (SD = 21.4) at baseline to 31.5 (SD = 21.3) following 6 weeks of treatment (p < 0.001). With the exception of the slight tinnitus group, all other groups (from mild to catastrophic) demonstrated a treatment response. Participants with low frequency tinnitus (<2000 Hz) had a significantly greater treatment response (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Customised acoustic therapy administered via a web-based platform demonstrated encouraging efficacy. At least mild symptoms at baseline and low frequency tinnitus were associated with a greater treatment response. Customised acoustic therapy offers accessible and efficacious tinnitus treatment, however longer term clinical studies are required to confirm the observed initial benefit is maintained.

FiveQ: A new easy-to-use validated clinical instrument for tinnitus severity.

OBJECTIVES: Tinnitus is a complex and debilitating phenomenon with potentially significant implications on quality of life. New presentations can be resource and time intensive for clinicians. Validated comprehensive tinnitus questionnaires may lack practical utility in the high-volume clinical setting. Concise, targeted questionnaires may offer an efficient alternative. This study aimed to assess the validity of the FiveQ, a novel five question construct designed to measure tinnitus severity. Convergent validity was assessed through correlating FiveQ against two comprehensive validated questionnaires, the Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire (THQ) and Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with prospective recruitment. The 117 voluntarily recruited participants completed the FiveQ, THI and THQ questionnaires. Results were comparatively analysed. SETTING: Recruitment was via electronic and print media, audiology clinics and public and private otolaryngology outpatient clinics. Surveys were completed electronically. PARTICIPANTS: Members of the public aged over 18 with subjective tinnitus were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURED: Analyses for establishing the content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, explorary factor analysis, and responsiveness of FiveQ was performed. RESULTS: FiveQ demonstrated a high positive correlation with both the THI (r = 0.773, p < .001) and THQ (r = 0.808, p < .001). Internal consistency for FiveQ reached an acceptable threshold (Cronbach's alpha 0.86). Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that one latent factor underlies the five items of the FiveQ. FiveQ demonstrated better responsiveness than both the THI and THQ after a 6 week interval repeat measurement. CONCLUSION: FiveQ demonstrated high-positive correlations with existing validated tinnitus questionnaires as well as acceptable internal consistency and factor analysis. The concise construct of FiveQ allows clinicians to efficiently estimate tinnitus severity, target treatment towards dominant symptoms and establish a reliable estimation of treatment response following interventions.

Affordability of current, and healthy, more equitable, sustainable diets by area of socioeconomic disadvantage and remoteness in Queensland: insights into food choice.

BACKGROUND: Poor diet is the leading preventable risk factor contributing to the burden of disease globally and in Australia, and is inequitably distributed. As the price of healthy foods is a perceived barrier to improved diets, evidence on the cost and affordability of current (unhealthy) and recommended (healthy, more equitable and sustainable) diets is required to support policy action. METHODS: This study applied the Healthy Diets ASAP (Australian Standardised Affordability and Pricing) methods protocol to measure the cost, cost differential and affordability of current and recommended diets for a reference household in Queensland, Australia. Food prices were collected in 18 randomly selected locations stratified by area of socioeconomic disadvantage and remoteness. Diet affordability was calculated for three income categories. RESULTS: Surprisingly, recommended diets would cost 20% less than the current diet in Queensland as a whole. Households spent around 60% of their food budget on discretionary choices (that is, those not required for health that are high in saturated fat, added sugar, salt and/or alcohol). Queensland families would need to spend around 23% of their income on recommended diets. However, recommended diets would not be affordable in low socioeconomic or very remote areas, costing 30 and 35% of median household income respectively. The government supplements due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic would improve affordability of recommended diets by 29%. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings highlight that while price is one factor affecting consumer food choice, other drivers such as taste, convenience, advertising and availability are important. Nevertheless, the study found that recommended diets would be unaffordable in very remote areas, and that low-income families are likely experiencing food stress, irrespective of where they live in Queensland. Policy actions, such as increasing to 20% the current 10% tax differential between basic healthy, and unhealthy foods in Australia, and supplementing incomes of vulnerable households, especially in remote areas, are recommended to help improve diet equity and sustainability, and health and wellbeing for all.