Sensitivity and specificity of self-reported psychiatric diagnoses amongst patients treated for opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) frequently present with comorbid psychiatric illnesses which have significant implications for their treatment outcomes. Notably, these are often identified by self-report. Our study examined the sensitivity and specificity of self-reported psychiatric diagnoses against a structured diagnostic interview in a cohort of patients receiving outpatient pharmacological treatment for OUD. METHODS: Using cross-sectional data from adults receiving outpatient opioid agonist treatment for OUD in clinics across Ontario, Canada, we compared participants' self-reported psychiatric diagnoses with those identified by the Mini Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) Version 6.0 administered at the time of study entry. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for self-report of psychiatric diagnoses. RESULTS: Amongst a sample of 683 participants, 24% (n = 162) reported having a comorbid psychiatric disorder. Only 104 of these 162 individuals (64%) reporting a comorbidity met criteria for a psychiatric disorder as per the MINI; meanwhile, 304 (75%) participants who self-reported no psychiatric comorbidity were in fact identified to meet MINI criteria for a psychiatric disorder. The sensitivity and specificity for any self-reported psychiatric diagnoses were 25.5% (95% CI 21.3, 30.0) and 78.9% (95% CI 73.6, 83.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings raise questions about the utility of self-reported psychiatric comorbidity in patients with OUD, particularly in the context of low sensitivity of self-reported diagnoses. Several factors may contribute to this including remittance and relapse of some psychiatric illnesses, underdiagnosis, and the challenge of differentiating psychiatric and substance-induced disorders. These findings highlight that other methods should be considered in order to identify comorbid psychiatric disorders in patients with OUD.

Psychometric validation of the FACE-Q Aesthetics Satisfaction with Temples scale in individuals seeking minimally invasive treatment to improve temple hollowing.

BACKGROUND: The FACE-Q Aesthetics is used extensively to measure patient reported outcomes for minimally invasive and surgical facial aesthetic treatments. We recently developed a new FACE-Q scale to assess satisfaction with the appearance of the temples. AIM: The aim of this study was to field test the FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale to examine its psychometric properties. METHODS: The FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale was administered to 171 adults (22 years or older) seeking minimally invasive treatment to improve temple hollowing as part of a clinical trial. The severity of temple hollowing was established through the clinician-reported Allergan Temple Hollowing scale (clinician-rated). The psychometric properties of the FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale were established by testing Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) assumptions and model fit; unidimensionality by principal component analysis; and construct validity by hypothesis testing. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 171 adults (mean age 54.7 ± 9.9, range, 25-82 years). RMT analysis provided evidence for the scientific soundness of a 12-item Satisfaction with Temples scale. The data fit the Rasch model (χ2 = 20.47, df = 24, p = 0.67), all items had ordered thresholds, and good item fit. Scale reliability was high, with Person Separation Index and Cronbach alpha values with and without extremes ≥0.93. Principal component analysis revealed a single component with high factor coefficients. Construct validity was established as scores for the Satisfaction with Temples and Face Overall scales were correlated (r = 0.623, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale is a reliable and valid measure that can be used in clinical practice and research to measure outcomes following treatment for temple hollowing.

Grand challenge in Biomaterials-wound healing.

Providing improved health care for wound, burn and surgical patients is a major goal for enhancing patient well-being, in addition to reducing the high cost of current health care treatment. The introduction of new and novel biomaterials and biomedical devices is anticipated to have a profound effect on the future improvement of many deleterious health issues. This publication will discuss the development of novel non-stinging liquid adhesive bandages in healthcare applications developed by Rochal Industries. The scientists/engineers at Rochal have participated in commercializing products in the field of ophthalmology, including rigid gas permeable contact lenses, soft hydrogel contact lenses, silicone hydrogel contact lenses, contact lens care solutions and cleaners, intraocular lens materials, intraocular controlled drug delivery, topical/intraocular anesthesia, and in the field of wound care, as non-stinging, spray-on liquid bandages to protect skin from moisture and body fluids and medical adhesive-related skin injuries. Current areas of entrepreneurial activity at Rochal Industries pertain to the development of new classes of biomaterials for wound healing, primarily in regard to microbial infection, chronic wound care, burn injuries and surgical procedures, with emphasis on innovation in product creation, which include cell-compatible substrates/scaffolds for wound healing, antimicrobial materials for opportunistic pathogens and biofilm reduction, necrotic wound debridement, scar remediation, treatment of diabetic ulcers, amelioration of pressure ulcers, amelioration of neuropathic pain and adjuvants for skin tissue substitutes.