BackgroundPatients with vestibular schwannomas (VS) are faced with complex management decisions. Watchful waiting, surgical resection, and radiation are all viable options with associated risks and benefits. We sought to determine if patients with VS experience decisional conflict when deciding between surgery or non-surgical management, and factors influencing the degree of decisional conflict.MethodsA prospective cohort study in two tertiary ambulatory skull-base clinics was performed. Patients with newly diagnosed or newly growing vestibular schwannomas were recruited. Patients were given a demographic form and the decisional conflict scale (DCS), a validated measure to assess the degree of uncertainty when making medical decisions. The degree of shared decision making (SDM) experienced by the patient and physician were assessed via the SDM-Q-10 and SDM-Q-Doc questionnaires, respectively. Non-parametric statistics were used. Questionnaires and demographic information were correlated with DCS using Spearman correlation coefficient and Mann-Whitney U. Logistic regression was performed to determine factors independently associated with DCS scores.ResultsSeventy-seven patients participated (55% female, aged 37–81 years); VS ranged in size from 2 mm–50 mm. Significant decisional conflict (DCS score 25 or greater) was experienced by 17 (22%) patients. Patients reported an average SDM-Q-10 score of 86, indicating highly perceived level of SDM. Physician and patient SDM scores were weakly correlated (p = 0.045, Spearman correlation coefficient 0.234). DCS scores were significantly negatively correlated with a decision to pursue surgery, presence of a trainee, and higher SDM-Q-10 score. DCS was higher with female gender. Using logistic regression, the SDM-Q-10 score was the only variable associated with significantly reduced DCS.ConclusionsAbout one fifth of patients deciding how to manage their vestibular schwannoma experienced a significant degree of decisional conflict. Involving the patients in the process through shared decision-making significantly reduced the degree of uncertainty patients experienced.

Objective Cochlear implantation can result in post-operative vestibular dysfunction of unknown clinical significance. The objective of this study was to characterize the presence, magnitude, and clinical significance of vestibular dysfunction that occurs after pediatric cochlear implantation. Data sources The databases Embase, Medline (OvidSP), and PubMed were used. Only articles published in English were included. Grey literature and unpublished sources were also reviewed. Study selection Articles published from 1980 until the present which documented pre-operative and post-operative vestibular testing on children under the age of 18 were used. Data extraction Parameters that were assessed included number of patients, pre- and post-operative vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs), head impulse testing (HIT), calorics, and posturography, timing of pre- and post-operative testing, symptomatology, and other demographic data such as etiology of the hearing loss. Data synthesis Ten articles were included. Relative risk values evaluating the effect of cochlear implantation on vestibular function were calculated for VEMPs and caloric testing due to the availability of published data. I 2 values were calculated and 95% confidence intervals were reported. Separate analyses were conducted for each individual study and a pooled analysis was conducted to yield an overall relative risk. Assessment on risk of bias in individual studies and overall was performed. Conclusion Pediatric cochlear implantation is associated with a statistically significant decrease in VEMP responses post-operatively (RR 1.8, p < 0.001, I 2 91.86, 95%CI 1.57–2.02). Similar results are not seen in caloric testing. Insufficient data is available for analysis of HIT and posturography. Further studies are necessary to determine the effect of cochlear implantation on objective vestibular measures post-operatively and whether any changes seen are clinically relevant in this population.

Background: Significant ankle arthritis results in functional limitations and patient morbidity. There is a need to measure symptoms and the impact of interventions on patient’s quality of life using valid and reliable patient-reported measurement instruments. The objective of this research was to validate the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale instrument in the preoperative setting using factor analysis, item response theory, and differential item function methods. Methods: This research is based on secondary analysis of patients scheduled for ankle arthrodesis or total ankle replacement in Vancouver, Canada. Participants completed the instrument between September 2014 and August 2017. Item response theory was used to estimate item difficulty and discrimination parameters, controlling for study participants’ underlying level of ankle function. Differential item function was examined for sex, age group, and surgery. There were 88 participants. Results: Modification indices suggested that item 10, “walking around the house,” would better fit the pain domain rather than the disability domain. Items in the pain domain displayed a range of discrimination and difficulty. Items in the disability domain exhibited a range of discrimination, though the disability domain had low difficulty. Differential item functioning for sex, age group, and ankle arthrodesis or total ankle replacement appeared to be ignorable. Conclusion: This evaluation of the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale found the instrument to be a strong measure of the effect of pain and dysfunction among patients with end-stage ankle arthritis, even when removing items 7 and 8, supporting its prior use in numerous clinical studies. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study.

No abstract

calculate prematurity rates both by race and Hispanic origin and for foreign born mothers and US born mothers. STUDY DESIGN: We calculated prematurity rates (births under 37 weeks) from the CDC natality files for 2016-2017 (the latest years available). Rates were calculated (where data were available) for US born and for foreign-born mothers for each birth country for each of the 4 groups (Non-Hispanic White (NHW), Non-Hispanic Black (NHB), Hispanic(H), and Asian (A)) for a total of 8 groups. RESULTS: This study includes 5,176,785 (77.1%) US born and 1,707,338 (22.9%) foreign born mothers from 259 countries. The overall prematurity rate was 9.8% (732,941/7,468,877). Foreign born mothers had significantly lower prematurity rates when compared to US-born mothers: 8.7% versus 10.1% (OR 0.85 (95%CI: .84,.85). Prematurity rates for mothers born in 34/38 foreign countries representing 80% of the top foreign born deliveries in the US were lower than those of US born mothers. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that foreign-born mothers have significantly lower prematurity rates than US born mothers across all races. This likely results in immigrants' lower health care expenses associated with premature newborns, suggesting that immigrants do not add a financial burden to this society as it relates to expenses for preterm newborn care. Reporting the nativity of the mother gives important additional insights into prematurity rates for all races and nativities.