Knowledge, Beliefs, and Practices of Australian Audiologists in Addressing the Mental Health Needs of Adults With Hearing Loss

Purpose Emotional and mental health is essential to overall health, but there has been little research on how to approach emotional and mental health in the audiology setting. This study provides a preliminary investigation into the current knowledge, beliefs, and practices of Australian audiologists in addressing the emotional and mental health needs of adults with hearing loss. Method A 22-item survey using open- and closed-ended questions was completed by 95 Australian audiologists using a cross-sectional study design. Results Two thirds of audiologists described being underconfident and lacking the skills required to provide emotional support to people with hearing loss. Barriers to delivering emotional support included feeling out of their depth (56.6%), time/caseload pressures (55.3%), and the perception that the provision of emotional support was not within an audiologist's scope of practice (31.6%). Audiologists described a desire to refer clients to mental health professionals yet highlighted significant barriers, including not knowing who to refer to (54.7%), when to make a referral (49.3%), or how to make a referral (38.6%). Audiologists overwhelmingly (96%) indicated that they would like to develop their knowledge and skills associated with the provision of emotional and mental health support in the audiological setting. Conclusion Knowledge, skills, and time were identified as the key areas that require attention in order to allow audiologists to address the emotional and mental health needs of adults with hearing loss

Cost-effectiveness of oral anticoagulants versus aspirin in patients after infrainguinal bypass grafting surgery

AbstractPurpose: Several antithrombotic therapies are available for the treatment of patients with peripheral vascular diseases. It is unknown how quality of life and costs of treatment are influenced by different therapies. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of oral anticoagulants versus aspirin in patients after infrainguinal bypass grafting surgery. Methods: Clinical outcome events and event-free survival were collected from 2650 patients in 77 centers who participated in the Dutch Bypass Oral anticoagulants or Aspirin trial. Approximately half the patients had critical ischemia; 60% received vein grafts, and 20% had femorocrural bypass grafts. A model that was primarily driven by clinical outcome events was used as a means of determining quality of life (EuroQol EQ-5D) and costs for each patient. The main outcome measure was the incremental health care costs in relation to the additional number of quality-adjusted life years and the additional number of event-free years. Results: The mean costs during the 21 months of follow-up were ϵ 6875 per patient in the oral anticoagulants group versus ϵ 7072 in the aspirin group (difference, 197; 95% CI, –746 to 343). The event-free survival was 1.10 years in the group treated with oral anticoagulants versus 1.09 years in the group treated with aspirin (difference, 0.01; 95% CI, –0.07 to 0.08), whereas the corresponding quality-adjusted life years were 1.06 and 1.05, respectively (difference, 0.01; 95% CI, –0.03 to 0.06). Conclusion: Health care costs, event-free survival, and quality-adjusted life years in patients after infrainguinal bypass surgery were not different in patients treated with aspirin and patients treated with oral anticoagulants. The extra costs of monitoring patients treated with oral anticoagulants were limited and play no role in the decision for treatment. (J Vasc Surg 2001;34:254-62.

Dutch orthopedic thromboprophylaxis: a 5-year follow-up survey

Background and purpose Previous surveys in the Netherlands have revealed that guidelines regarding orthopedic thromboprophylaxis were not followed and that a wide variation in protocols exists. This survey was performed to assess the current use of thromboprophylactic modalities and to compare it with the results of a previous survey

‘‘Epic ear defence’’—a game to educate children on the risks of noise-related hearing loss

Hearing loss resulting from overexposure to entertainment-related sounds is a modern concern. ‘‘Epic Ear Defence’’ places the player in the three-dimensional environment of the ear canal and challenges the player to defend the ear from various noises, to delay the onset of noise-related hearing loss.Chevron Australia provided funding through their Community Donations Schemehttp://www.liebertpub.com/g4ham201

Interactive Marine Spatial Planning: Siting Tidal Energy Arrays around the Mull of Kintyre

The rapid development of the offshore renewable energy sector has led to an increased requirement for Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) and, increasingly, this is carried out in the context of the ‘ecosystem approach’ (EA) to management. We demonstrate a novel method to facilitate implementation of the EA. Using a real-time interactive mapping device (touch-table) and stakeholder workshops we gathered data and facilitated negotiation of spatial trade-offs at a potential site for tidal renewable energy off the Mull of Kintyre (Scotland). Conflicts between the interests of tidal energy developers and commercial and recreational users of the area were identified, and use preferences and concerns of stakeholders were highlighted. Social, cultural and spatial issues associated with conversion of common pool to private resource were also revealed. The method identified important gaps in existing spatial data and helped to fill these through interactive user inputs. The workshops developed a degree of consensus between conflicting users on the best areas for potential development suggesting that this approach should be adopted during MSP

Extending an evidence hierarchy to include topics other than treatment: revising the Australian 'levels of evidence'

Background: In 1999 a four-level hierarchy of evidence was promoted by the National Health and Medical Research Council in Australia. The primary purpose of this hierarchy was to assist with clinical practice guideline development, although it was co-opted for use in systematic literature reviews and health technology assessments. In this hierarchy interventional study designs were ranked according to the likelihood that bias had been eliminated and thus it was not ideal to assess studies that addressed other types of clinical questions. This paper reports on the revision and extension of this evidence hierarchy to enable broader use within existing evidence assessment systems. Methods: A working party identified and assessed empirical evidence, and used a commissioned review of existing evidence assessment schema, to support decision-making regarding revision of the hierarchy. The aim was to retain the existing evidence levels I-IV but increase their relevance for assessing the quality of individual diagnostic accuracy, prognostic, aetiologic and screening studies. Comprehensive public consultation was undertaken and the revised hierarchy was piloted by individual health technology assessment agencies and clinical practice guideline developers. After two and a half years, the hierarchy was again revised and commenced a further 18 month pilot period. Results: A suitable framework was identified upon which to model the revision. Consistency was maintained in the hierarchy of "levels of evidence" across all types of clinical questions; empirical evidence was used to support the relationship between study design and ranking in the hierarchy wherever possible; and systematic reviews of lower level studies were themselves ascribed a ranking. The impact of ethics on the hierarchy of study designs was acknowledged in the framework, along with a consideration of how harms should be assessed. Conclusion: The revised evidence hierarchy is now widely used and provides a common standard against which to initially judge the likelihood of bias in individual studies evaluating interventional, diagnostic accuracy, prognostic, aetiologic or screening topics. Detailed quality appraisal of these individual studies, as well as grading of the body of evidence to answer each clinical, research or policy question, can then be undertaken as required.Tracy Merlin, Adele Weston and Rebecca Toohe