The objective is to report outcomes of an interdisciplinary group-based residential chronic pain recovery program (CPRC), located in a private non-profit psychiatric hospital. The chronic pain program was aimed at treatment and engagement in self-care of both pain and co-occurring disorders in a residential facility that also offered treatment for specific psychiatric disorders. Patients and Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted that included a convenience sample of 131 patients admitted from March 2012 through August 2017 who completed treatment. An interdisciplinary team of professionals provided psychobehavioral therapy, movement therapies and medication management. Patients completed a battery of psycho-social and demographic questionnaires on admission and before discharge of the program. Results: Significant differences were noted in pain severity, pain interference, depression and anxiety (p<.01) between admission and discharge, and the Chronic Pain Coping Inventory demonstrated significant differences in guarding (p <.001), asking (p =.018), exercise (p <.001), relaxation (p <.001), and pacing (p=.024). Of patients using opioids on admission, at discharge, 37% had tapered and remained off all opioids, 43% were using buprenorphine for opioid use disorder, and 20% continued on analgesic opioids. Conclusion: Treatment was associated with reductions in pain severity and interference, in anxiety and in depression as well as improvements in pain coping. Additionally, there was a reduction in reliance on opioids for pain relief.

To assess the health benefits of a vegan diet, observational studies of diabetes (noninsulin dependent; NIDDM), cancer, mortality, gut microbiota, hypertension, lipids, and overweight were examined. Utilizing PRISMA items to identify articles and assess their quality for inclusion, 44 studies were screened into the review. In two separate studies, vegans did not have a reduced risk of diagnosis of "any" cancer, nor of specific cancers when the effects of BMI were adjusted. When data were aggregated, there was a reduced risk of any cancer. Vegans had lower total cholesterol and LDL-C levels compared to omnivores, and in some cases other dietary groups. In the US, there was a reduced risk of a diagnosis of NIDDM and in Western countries, vegans had lower BMI. Research support for reduced risk of diagnosis of female cancers, improved mortality rates, lower blood pressure, lower triglycerides, and a healthier microbiome for vegans compared to omnivores was inconsistent. There was no evidence that reduced specific cancer incidence rates were lower in vegans although inadequate sample sizes had hampered these analyses. In vegans, HDL-C levels were either lower or not significantly different from omnivores. Geographic location was a strong moderator with the most compelling evidence for the health advantages of a vegan diet coming from the US, whereas in Taiwan, India and Vietnam, there was much less evidence of its benefit. In some instances, sex moderated the association between adopting the diet and health outcomes. Adherence, specific content of the diet, and dietary comparison groups utilized in studies may also affect results. Although a vegan diet is associated with some health benefits, the level of support for the benefit varied according to the health outcome being measured, with evidence emerging that BMI is an important mediator and geography and to a lesser extent sex are important moderators.

No abstract

No abstract

The purpose of the current study was to explore how students at a Midwestern University rated the fairness of a student with a disability receiving specific educational accommodations when controlling for the race of the student requesting the accommodation. We were also interested in exploring the impact of disability status and educational level of the student participants on their perception of how fair it would be for the student with the disability in the scenario to receive specific educational accommodations. A logistic regression analysis revealed that the race of the hypothetical student with a disability was not a significant predictor of whether a student deserved educational accommodations. Additionally, participants that disclosed that they had a disability thought the student in the disability-related case scenarios were more deserving of accommodations compared to participants that did not disclose having a disability.