An Evaluation of a Continuing Education Workshop for Audiologists on the Assessment and Management of Tinnitus.

INTRODUCTION: Tinnitus assessment and management is an important component of audiology. The benefits of continuing education (CE) workshops in the field of tinnitus have not been published. This study evaluated the outcomes of a workshop centered around a Sound Therapy and Aural Rehabilitation for Tinnitus (START) framework. Our hypotheses were that a CE workshop would (1) be useful, (2) improve clinician's knowledge and willingness to undertake tinnitus practice, and (3) result in learners using knowledge gained in their practice. METHODS: Twenty-five participants attending a 3-day tinnitus workshop were invited to complete an evaluation immediately and 3 months after the workshop's completion. The workshop consisted of seminars and practical sessions. The pedagogical approaches employed were experiential (theory building, reflection, and testing) and community of practice (shared experiences). RESULTS: Participants reported on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not useful-5 = excellent) a high level of satisfaction both immediately after the workshop (ratings of usefulness: mean, 4.8; SD, 0.4; willingness to practice: 4.6; SD. 0.6; ability to manage: 4.6; SD, 0.5; all "excellent" ratings) and 3 months later (ratings of usefulness: mean, 4.2; SD, 0.9, "very useful;" willingness to practice: 4.6; SD, 0.6, "excellent;" ability to manage: 4.1; SD. 0.5, "very useful"). Open-ended questions indicated participants made changes in their practice that reflected material provided in the CE. CONCLUSION: The workshop was successful in improving knowledge and confidence of audiologists in undertaking tinnitus assessment and management, but the need for ongoing support and supervision was a common theme.

Why are some cases not on track? An item analysis of the Assessment for Signal Cases during inpatient psychotherapy.

Within the Routine Outcome Monitoring system "OQ-Analyst," the questionnaire "Assessment for Signal Cases" (ASC) supports therapists in detecting potential reasons for not-on-track trajectories. Factor analysis and a machine learning algorithm (LASSO with 10-fold cross-validation) were applied, and potential predictors of not-on-track classifications were tested using logistic multilevel modeling methods. The factor analysis revealed a shortened (30 items) version of the ASC with good internal consistency (α = 0.72-0.89) and excellent predictive value (area under the curve = 0.98; positive predictive value = 0.95; negative predictive value = 0.94). Item-level analyses showed that interpersonal problems captured by specific ASC items (not feeling able to speak about problems with family members; feeling rejected or betrayed) are the most important predictors of not-on-track trajectories. It should be considered that our results are based on analyses of ASC items only. Our findings need to be replicated in future studies including other potential predictors of not-on-track trajectories (e.g., changes in medication, specific therapeutic techniques, or treatment adherence), which were not measured this study.

How to measure the impact of premenstrual symptoms? Development and validation of the German PMS-Impact Questionnaire.

With 75% of women of reproductive age affected, premenstrual symptoms are very common, ranging from emotional and cognitive to physical symptoms. Premenstrual Syndrome and Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder can lead to substantial functional interference and psychological distress comparable to that of dysthymic disorders. The assessment of this impact is required as a part of the diagnostic procedure in the DSM-5. In the absence of a specific measure, the authors developed the PMS-Impact Questionnaire. A sample of 101 women reporting severe premenstrual complaints was assessed with the twenty-two items in the questionnaire during their premenstrual phase in an ongoing intervention study at the Philipps-University Marburg from August 2013 until January 2015. An exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-factor solution (labeled Psychological Impact and Functional Impact) with 18 items. A Cronbach's alpha of 0.90 for Psychological Impact and of 0.90 for Functional Impact indicated good reliability. Convergent construct validity was demonstrated by moderate to high correlations with the Pain Disability Index. Low correlations with the Big Five Inventory-10 indicated good divergent validity. The PMS-Impact Questionnaire was found to be a valid, reliable, and an economic measure to assess the impact of premenstrual symptoms. In future research, cross validations and confirmatory factor analyses should be conducted.