Genetic outcomes in children with developmental language disorder: a systematic review.

Introduction: Developmental language disorder (DLD) is a common childhood condition negatively influencing communication and psychosocial development. An increasing number of pathogenic variants or chromosomal anomalies possibly related to DLD have been identified. To provide a base for accurate clinical genetic diagnostic work-up for DLD patients, understanding the specific genetic background is crucial. This study aims to give a systematic literature overview of pathogenic variants or chromosomal anomalies causative for DLD in children. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed and Embase on available literature related to the genetic background of diagnosed DLD in children. Included papers were critically appraised before data extraction. An additional search in OMIM was performed to see if the described DLD genes are associated with a broader clinical spectrum. Results: The search resulted in 15,842 papers. After assessing eligibility, 47 studies remained, of which 25 studies related to sex chromosome aneuploidies and 15 papers concerned other chromosomal anomalies (SCAs) and/or Copy Number Variants (CNVs), including del15q13.1-13.3 and del16p11.2. The remaining 7 studies displayed a variety of gene variants. 45 (candidate) genes related to language development, including FOXP2, GRIN2A, ERC1, and ATP2C2. After an additional search in the OMIM database, 22 of these genes were associated with a genetic disorder with a broader clinical spectrum, including intellectual disability, epilepsy, and/or autism. Conclusion: Our study illustrates that DLD can be related to SCAs and specific CNV's. The reported (candidate) genes (n = 45) in the latter category reflect the genetic heterogeneity and support DLD without any comorbidities and syndromic language disorder have an overlapping genetic etiology.

Diagnostic accuracy of the screenings Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST-12) in COVID-19 induced olfactory disorders.

Objective olfactory function can be assessed using validated olfactory tests like the Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST). However, their extensive nature makes them less suitable for clinical practice. To address this, shorter olfactory tests like the screenings Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST-12) can be used for screening purposes and reduce testing time. The SST-12 serves as a diagnostic tool for screening olfaction in cases unrelated to COVID-19. However, these screening tests are uncertain regarding their accuracy in detecting olfactory dysfunction in patients with COVID-19 as the plausible cause. We aim to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the SST-12 in adults with post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction. We performed a diagnostic accuracy study with data from 113 consecutive COVID-19 diagnosed patients who experienced objectified smell loss ever since. At approximately 6 months after their diagnosis, all participants underwent the SST (reference standard), part of the SST was the SST-12 (index test). Diagnostic accuracy of the SST-12 is measured as negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and specificity. The SST-12 detected smell loss in 85 patients among 91 patients with smell loss and ruled out smell loss in 15 patients among the 22 patients without smell loss based on the reference standard. Making sensitivity 93.4% (CI 0.87-0.97), and specificity 68.2% (CI 0.48-0.85). Out of the 92 patients with a positive test result on SST-12, 85 patients had indeed smell loss (PPV 92.4% CI 0.86-0.97), and out of the 21 patients with a negative test result, 15 patients had no smell loss regarding the reference standard (NPV 71.4% CI 0.50-0.88). The findings suggest that the SST-12 holds promise as a useful tool for identifying individuals with smell loss, also in individuals with COVID-19 as cause, but it is important to have a good understanding of the interpretation of the results of the SST-12 when considering its implementation in clinical practice.

Benefit-Harm Analysis for Informed Decision Making on Participating in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Modeling Study.

OBJECTIVES: To facilitate informed decision making on participating in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, we assessed the benefit-harm balance of CRC screening for a wide range of subgroups over different time horizons. METHODS: The study combined incidence proportions of benefits and harms of (not) participating in CRC screening estimated by the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to CAncer microsimulation model, a preference eliciting survey, and benefit-harm balance modeling combining all outcomes to determine the net health benefit of CRC screening over 10, 20, and 30 years. Probability of net health benefit was estimated for 210 different subgroups based on age, sex, previous participation in CRC screening, and lifestyle. RESULTS: CRC screening was net beneficial in 183 of 210 subgroups over 30 years (median probability [MP] of 0.79, interquartile range [IQR] of 0.69-0.85) across subgroups. Net health benefit was greater for men (MP 0.82; IQR 0.69-0.89) than women (MP 0.76; IQR 0.67-0.83) and for those without history of participation in previous screenings (MP 0.84; IQR 0.80-0.89) compared with those with (MP 0.69; IQR 0.59-0.75). Net health benefit decreased with increasing age, from MP of 0.84 (IQR 0.80-0.86) at age 55 to 0.61 (IQR 0.56-0.71) at age 75. Shorter time horizons led to lower benefit, with MP of 0.70 (IQR 0.62-0.80) over 20 years and 0.54 (IQR 0.48-0.67) over 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our benefit-harm analysis provides information about net health benefit of screening participation, based on important characteristics and preferences of individuals, which could assist screening invitees in making informed decisions on screening participation.

One-year psychophysical evaluation of COVID-19-induced olfactory disorders: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory disorders are common in COVID-19. While many patients recover within weeks, a notable number of patients suffer from prolonged olfactory disorders. Much research has focused on the acute phase of olfactory disorders in COVID-19; however, there is still inconsistency regarding the prognosis. We aim to assess both objective and subjective olfactory function in patients with persisting olfactory disorders following COVID-19, 1 year after diagnosis. METHODS: We objectively measured olfactory function in 77 patients who initially had COVID-19-induced smell disorders, 1 year after confirmed diagnosis. These patients previously underwent two objective measurements at approximately 3 and 6 months after COVID-19, in the context of the COCOS trial (COrticosteroids for COvid-19-induced loss of Smell). The main outcome measurement was TDI score (threshold-discrimination-identification) on Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST). Secondary outcomes included objective gustatory function on Taste Strip Test (TST), self-reported olfactory, gustatory and trigeminal function on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and outcomes on questionnaires about quality of life, and nasal symptoms. RESULTS: The findings of this study show that 1 year following COVID-19, the median TDI score increased to 30.75 (IQR 27.38-33.5), regarded as normosmia. The median TDI score started at 21.25 (IQR 18.25-24.75) at baseline and increased to 27.5 (IQR 23.63-30.0) at 6 months following COVID-19. The increase of 9.5 points on the TDI score between baseline and 1 year after COVID-19 marks a clinically relevant improvement. Regarding the self-reported VAS score (1-10) on sense of smell, it increased from 1.2 (IQR 0.4-3.0) at baseline to 3.2 (IQR 1.4-6.0) at 6 months and further improved up to 6.1 (IQR 2.7-7.5) after 1 year. Objective gustatory function increased with 2 points on TST a year after diagnosis. Self-reported olfactory, gustatory, and trigeminal functions also improved over time, as did quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Objective and self-reported olfactory function continued to improve 1 year after COVID-19. The median TDI score of 30.75 (IQR 27.38-33.5) is regarded as normosmia, which is a favorable outcome. However, the rate of improvement on TDI score reduces over time.

Assessing the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial examining the effect of hearing aids on cognitive decline in elderly individuals: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is one of the leading potentially modifiable risk factors for dementia. There is growing evidence suggesting that treating hearing loss with hearing aids could be a relatively low-cost intervention in reducing cognitive decline and the risk of dementia in the long term. However, given the current constraints of the limited evidence, it is premature to draw definitive conclusions about the effect of hearing aids on cognitive functioning. More long-term randomised studies examining this effect would be recommended. Prior to embarking on large-scale lengthy randomised controlled trials (RCTs), it is imperative to determine the viability of such studies. Therefore, the purpose of the current study is to assess the feasibility of a RCT that investigates the effect of hearing aids on cognitive functioning in elderly hearing impaired individuals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this randomised controlled feasibility trial, 24 individuals aged 65 years or older with mild to moderate hearing loss (≥35-<50 dB pure tone average (0.5-4 kHz) unilateral or bilateral) will be included and randomised towards a hearing aid intervention or no intervention. At baseline and at 6-month follow-up, a test battery consisting of cognitive tests and questionnaires will be administered to both groups. The primary outcome of the study is the willingness of hearing impaired individuals to be randomised for hearing amplification in a study regarding cognition. The secondary outcomes are the feasibility of the test battery and the therapy compliance of hearing aid use. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University Medical Centre Utrecht (NL80594.041.22, V.3, January 2023). The trial results will be made accessible to the public in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN84550071.

A Comparative Analysis of the Incidence, Severity and Duration of Smell and Taste Loss in COVID-19 Cases Versus Non-COVID-19 Cases: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the relevance of olfactory and gustatory disorders. However, these symptoms can also be caused by various other factors. In this study we aimed to compare the incidence, severity and duration between COVID-19 related and non-COVID-19 related smell and taste disorders. We conducted a longitudinal cohort study using data from the Dutch biobank Lifelines, which includes over 167,000 participants. The data were collected using 27 questionnaires distributed between March 2020 and May 2022. Descriptive data and the incidence of smell and taste loss in both groups were calculated. To visualize the proportion of severity rates of symptoms, a heatmap was created. A survival analysis was conducted and presented in a reversed Kaplan-Meier curve to show the probability of having persistent smell loss in both groups. The study included 235,722 participants. The incidence of smell loss was higher in the COVID-19 positive group, when compared to the COVID-19 negative group. We found varying degrees of symptom severity in COVID-19 positive cases, ranging from mild to severe, while non-COVID-19 related cases mostly reported mild symptoms. The survival outcome for smell and taste loss was 0.12 (SE 0.03, 95% CI 0.07-0.21) in COVID-19 related cases, and was 0.17 (SE 0.03, 95% CI 0.12-0.24) in cases related to other causes. This study reveals a higher incidence and severity of smell and taste loss in individuals with COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 related cases. However, non-COVID-19 related smell and taste loss tend to have a longer duration.

A monocenter, patient-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, non-inferiority study to compare cochlear implant receiver/stimulator device fixation techniques (COMFIT) with and without drilling in adults eligible for primary cochlear implantation.

BACKGROUND: During the cochlear implantation procedure, the receiver/stimulator (R/S) part of the implant is fixated to prevent postoperative device migration, which could have an adverse effect on the position of the electrode array in the cochlea. We aim to compare the migration rates of two fixation techniques, the bony recess versus the subperiosteal tight pocket without bony sutures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-blind randomized controlled trial will recruit a total of 112 primary cochlear implantation adult patients, eligible for implantation according to the current standard of practice. Randomization will be performed by an electronic data capture system Castor EDC, with participants block randomized to either bony recess or standard subperiosteal tight pocket in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by age. The primary outcome of this study is the R/S device migration rate; secondary outcomes include patient-experienced burden using the validated COMPASS questionnaire, electrode migration rate, electrode impedance values, speech perception scores, correlation between R/S migration, electrode array migration and patient complaints, assessment of complication rates, and validation of an implant position measurement method. Data will be collected at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 3 months, and 12 months after surgery. All data analyses will be conducted according to the intention-to-treat principle. DISCUSSION: Cochlear implantation by means of creating a tight subperiosteal pocket without drilling a bony seat is a minimally invasive fixation technique with many advantages. However, the safety of this technique has not yet been proven with certainty. This is the first randomized controlled trial that directly compares the minimally invasive technique with the conventional method of drilling a bony seat. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NL9698. Registered on 31 August 2021.

Analysis and comparison of clinical practice guidelines regarding treatment recommendations for chronic tinnitus in adults: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if, and to what extent, published clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of chronic tinnitus vary in their recommendations. DESIGN: Systematic review of guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE and GIN electronic databases were searched in March 2022 and the search was updated in June 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included clinical practice guidelines that gave recommendations on the treatment of tinnitus. No language restrictions were applied. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted the data and used the AGREE checklist to report on reporting. RESULTS: A total of 10 guidelines were identified and included, published between 2011 and 2021. Recommendations for 13 types of tinnitus treatments were compared. Large differences in guideline development and methodology were found. Seven of the 10 guidelines included a systematic search of the literature to identify the available evidence. Six of the 10 guidelines used a framework for the development of the guideline. Reporting was poor in multiple guidelines. Counselling and cognitive behavioural therapy were the only treatments that were recommended for treating tinnitus associated distress by all guidelines that reported on these topics. Tinnitus retraining therapy, sound therapy, hearing aids and cochlear implantation were not unanimously recommended either due to the lack of evidence, a high risk of bias or judgement of no beneficial effect of the specific treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There were notable differences with respect to whether guidelines considered the available evidence sufficient enough to make a recommendation. Notably, we identified substantial differences in the rigour of guideline design and development. Reporting was poor in many guidelines. Future guidelines could benefit from the use of reporting tools to improve reporting and transparency and the inclusion of guideline experts and patients to improve the quality of clinical practice guidelines on tinnitus.

Development and internal validation of a prediction model for the presence of tinnitus in a Dutch population-based cohort.

Objectives: In this study we aim to develop and internally validate a prediction model on tinnitus experience in a representative sample of the Dutch general population. Methods: We developed a multivariable prediction model using elastic net logistic regression with data from the Dutch Lifelines Cohort Study. This is a multigenerational cohort study on adults who are located in the northern parts of the Netherlands. The model was internally validated using 10-fold cross-validation. The outcome of the model was tinnitus presence, for which we used 24 candidate predictors on different domains (among others demographic, hearing specific, and mental health variables). We assessed the overall predictive performance, discrimination, and calibration of the model. Results: Data on 122.884 different participants were included, of which 7,965 (6.5%, 0 missing) experienced tinnitus. Nine variables were included in the final model: sex, hearing aids, hearing limitations, arterial blood pressure, quality of sleep, general health, symptom checklist of somatic complaints, cardiovascular risk factors, and age. In the final model, the Brier score was 0.056 and 0.787 in internal validation. Conclusion: We developed and internally validated a prediction model on tinnitus presence in a multigenerational cohort of the Dutch general population. From the 24 candidate predictors, the final model included nine predictors.

Health Economic Cost Analysis for Percutaneous Bone Conduction Devices: The Minimally Invasive Ponto Surgery Versus Linear Incision Technique with Tissue Preservation.

OBJECTIVES: To identify differences in mean cost per patient between the Minimally Invasive Ponto Surgery (MIPS) and the linear incision technique with tissue preservation (LITT-P). STUDY DESIGN: Health economic cost analysis. SETTING: The analysis was performed in a randomized multicenter controlled trial cohort. PATIENTS: Adult patients eligible for unilateral bone conduction device surgery. INTERVENTIONS: MIPS versus LITT-P surgery for bone conduction device implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative and postoperative costs were identified and compared. RESULTS: The difference in mean cost per patient between both techniques was €77.83 in favor of the MIPS after 22 months follow-up. The mean costs per patient were lower in the MIPS cohort for surgery (€145.68), outpatient visits (€24.27), systemic antibiotic therapy with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (€0.30) or clindamycin (€0.40), abutment change (€0.36), and abutment removal (€0.18). The mean costs per patient were higher for implant and abutment set (€18.00), topical treatment with hydrocortison/oxytetracycline/polymyxine B (€0.43), systemic therapy with azithromycin (€0.09) or erythromycin (€1.15), local revision surgery (€1.45), elective explantation (€1.82), and implant extrusion (€70.42). Additional analysis of scenarios in which all patients were operated under general or local anesthesia or with recalculation when using current implant survival rates showed that differences in mean cost per patient were also in favor of the MIPS. CONCLUSION: The difference between the MIPS and the LITT-P in mean cost per patient was €77.83 in favor of the MIPS after 22 months of follow-up. The MIPS is an economically responsible technique and could be promising for the future.

The impact of tinnitus on adult cochlear implant recipients: A mixed-method approach.

BACKGROUND: Tinnitus is a common problem in patients with a cochlear implant (CI). Between 4% and 25% of CI recipients experience a moderate to severe tinnitus handicap. However, apart from handicap scores, little is known about the real-life impact tinnitus has on those with CIs. We aimed to explore the impact of tinnitus on adult CI recipients, situations impacting tinnitus, tinnitus-related difficulties and their management strategies, using an exploratory sequential mixed-method approach. METHODS: A 2-week web-based forum was conducted using Cochlear Ltd.'s online platform, Cochlear Conversation. A thematic analysis was conducted on the data from the forum discussion to develop key themes and sub-themes. To quantify themes and sub-themes identified, a survey was developed in English with face validity using cognitive interviews, then translated into French, German and Dutch and disseminated on the Cochlear Conversation platform, in six countries (Australia, France, Germany, New Zealand, the Netherlands and United Kingdom). Participants were adult CI recipients experiencing tinnitus who received a Cochlear Ltd. CI after 18 years of age. RESULTS: Four key themes were identified using thematic analysis of the discussion forum: tinnitus experience, situations impacting tinnitus, difficulties associated with tinnitus and tinnitus management. Among the 414 participants of the survey, tinnitus burden on average was a moderate problem without their sound processor and not a problem with the sound processor on. Fatigue, stress, concentration, group conversation and hearing difficulties were the most frequently reported difficulties and was reported to intensify when not wearing the sound processor. For most CI recipients, tinnitus seemed to increase when performing a hearing test, during a CI programming session, or when tired, stressed, or sick. To manage their tinnitus, participants reported turning on their sound processor and avoiding noisy environments. CONCLUSION: The qualitative analysis showed that tinnitus can affect everyday life of CI recipients in various ways and highlighted the heterogeneity in their tinnitus experiences. The survey findings extended this to show that tinnitus impact, related difficulties, and management strategies often depend on sound processor use. This exploratory sequential mixed-method study provided a better understanding of the potential benefits of sound processor use, and thus of intracochlear electrical stimulation, on the impact of tinnitus.

Diagnostic accuracy of retinal optical coherence tomography in children with a newly diagnosed brain tumour.

PURPOSE: To estimate the diagnostic accuracy of circumpapillary retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness and macular ganglion cell layer-inner plexiform layer (GCL-IPL) thickness measurements to discriminate an abnormal visual function (i.e. abnormal age-based visual acuity and/or visual field defect) in children with a newly diagnosed brain tumour. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis of a prospective longitudinal nationwide cohort study was conducted at four hospitals in the Netherlands, including the national referral centre for paediatric oncology. Patients aged 0-18 years with a newly diagnosed brain tumour and reliable visual acuity and/or visual field examination and optical coherence tomography were included. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). RESULTS: Of 115 patients included in the study (67 [58.3%] male; median age 10.6 years [range, 0.2-17.8 years]), reliable RNFL thickness and GCL-IPL thickness measurements were available in 92 patients (80.0%) and 84 patients (73.0%), respectively. The sensitivity for detecting an abnormal visual function was 74.5% for average RNFL thickness and 41.7% for average GCL-IPL thickness at a specificity of 44.5% and 82.9%, respectively. The PPV and NPV were 33.0% and 82.6% for the average RNFL thickness and 57.1% and 82.2% for the average GCL-IPL thickness. CONCLUSION: An abnormal visual function was discriminated correctly by using the average RNFL thickness in seven out of ten patients and by using the average GCL-IPL thickness in four out of ten patients. The relatively high NPVs signified that patients with normal average RNFL thickness and average GCL-IPL thickness measurements had a relative high certainty of a normal visual function.

Perceived Importance of the Benefits and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Best-Worst Scaling Study.

OBJECTIVES: To elicit the relative importance of the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among potential screening participants in the Dutch population. METHODS: In a consensus meeting with 11 experts, risk reduction of CRC and CRC deaths (benefits) and complications from colonoscopy, stress of receiving positive fecal immunological test (FIT) results, as well as false-positive and false-negative FIT results (harms) were selected as determinant end points to consider during decision making. We conducted an online best-worst scaling survey among adults aged 55 to 75 years from the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel of The Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research to elicit preference values for these outcomes. The preference values were estimated using conditional logit regression. RESULTS: Of 265 participants, 234 (89%) had ever participated in CRC screening. Compared with the stress of receiving a positive FIT result, the outcome perceived most important was the risk of CRC death (odds ratio [OR] 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-5.1), followed by risk of CRC (OR 4.1; 95% CI 3.6-4.7), a false-negative FIT result (OR 3.1; 95% CI 2.7-3.5), colonoscopy complications (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.8), and a false-positive FIT result (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3-1.6). The magnitude of these differences in perceived importance varied according to age, educational level, ethnic background, and whether the individual had previously participated in CRC screening. CONCLUSION: Dutch men and women eligible for FIT-based CRC screening perceive the benefits of screening to be more important than the harms.

Prediction Models for Tinnitus Presence and the Impact of Tinnitus on Daily Life: A Systematic Review.

The presence of tinnitus does not necessarily imply associated suffering. Prediction models on the impact of tinnitus on daily life could aid medical professionals to direct specific medical resources to those (groups of) tinnitus patients with specific levels of impact. Models of tinnitus presence could possibly identify risk factors for tinnitus. We systematically searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for articles published up to January 2021. We included all studies that reported on multivariable prediction models for tinnitus presence or the impact of tinnitus on daily life. Twenty-one development studies were included, with a total of 31 prediction models. Seventeen studies made a prediction model for the impact of tinnitus on daily life, three studies made a prediction model for tinnitus presence and one study made models for both. The risk of bias was high and reporting was poor in all studies. The most used predictors in the final impact on daily life models were depression- or anxiety-associated questionnaire scores. Demographic predictors were most common in final presence models. No models were internally or externally validated. All published prediction models were poorly reported and had a high risk of bias. This hinders the usability of the current prediction models. Methodological guidance is available for the development and validation of prediction models. Researchers should consider the importance and clinical relevance of the models they develop and should consider validation of existing models before developing new ones.

Prednisolone does not improve olfactory function after COVID-19: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Prednisolone has been suggested as a treatment for olfactory disorders after COVID-19, but evidence is scarce. Hence, we aimed to determine the efficacy of a short oral prednisolone treatment on patients with persistent olfactory disorders after COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-centered trial in the Netherlands. Patients were included if they were > 18 years old and if they had persistent (> 4 weeks) olfactory disorders within 12 weeks after a confirmed COVID-19 test. The treatment group received oral prednisolone 40 mg once daily for 10 days and the placebo group received matching placebo. In addition, all patients performed olfactory training. The primary outcome was the objective olfactory function on Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST) 12 weeks after the start of treatment, measured in Threshold-Discrimination-Identification (TDI) score. Secondary outcomes were objective gustatory function assessed by the Taste Strip Test (TST) and subjective self-reported outcomes on questionnaires about olfactory, gustatory and trigeminal function, quality of life, and nasal symptoms. The CONSORT 2010 guideline was performed. RESULTS: Between November 2021 and February 2022, we included 115 eligible patients, randomly assigned to the treatment (n = 58) or placebo group (n = 57). No difference in olfactory function between groups was obtained after 12 weeks. Median TDI score on SST was 26.8 (IQR 23.6-29.3) in the placebo group and 28.8 (IQR 24.0-30.9) in the prednisolone group, with a median difference of 2.0 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.5). There was similar improvement on olfactory function in both groups after 12 weeks. Furthermore, on secondary outcomes, we obtained no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This trial shows that prednisolone does not improve olfactory function after COVID-19. Therefore, we recommend not prescribing prednisolone for patients with persistent olfactory disorders after COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry with trial ID ISRCTN70794078.

Analysis of a Cochlear Implant Database: Changes in Tinnitus Prevalence and Distress After Cochlear Implantation.

The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence and distress of tinnitus pre- and post-cochlear implantation in patients with bilateral severe to profound hearing loss. In this retrospective study, we included patients from a cochlear implant clinic in Perth, Western Australia. Pre- and post-cochlear implantation data from 300 implant recipients were collected on self-reported presence of tinnitus, tinnitus distress using the Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire (TRQ), hearing-related quality of life using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), and consonant-nucleus vowel-consonant (CNC) word recognition test scores. Retrospectively, patients were grouped into those with or without tinnitus, and the grade of tinnitus distress. The potential factors associated with post-implantation changes in the presence of tinnitus and its distress were evaluated. Tinnitus prevalence was 55.8% pre-operatively and 44.3% post-implantation with a median TRQ score respectively of 12.0 (IQR: 1.0-28.0) and 3.5 (IQR: 0.0-16.2) points. Among the 96 patients experiencing tinnitus pre-implantation, 14.6% patients experienced moderate to catastrophic tinnitus distress pre-implantation compared to 6.3% post-implantation. To conclude, the pre- and post-implantation median TRQ score for the cohort population showed that tinnitus was a "slight" handicap. Tinnitus prevalence and its associated tinnitus distress decreased post-implantation. Patients with tinnitus post-implantation were significantly younger and had less severe pre-implantation hearing loss in the non-implanted ear than patients without tinnitus. Further research is needed to understand the factors influencing changes in tinnitus.

Ophthalmological Findings in Youths With a Newly Diagnosed Brain Tumor.

Importance: Visual impairment is an irreversible adverse effect in individuals who experienced a childhood brain tumor. Ophthalmological evaluation at diagnosis enables early detection of vision loss, decision-making about treatment, and when applicable, the timely use of visual interventions. However, awareness of visual impairment in clinical practice is suboptimal, and adherence to ophthalmological evaluation needs to be improved. Objective: To assess the prevalence and types of abnormal ophthalmological findings in youths with a newly diagnosed brain tumor. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this nationwide, prospective cohort study, youths aged 0 to 18 years with a newly diagnosed brain tumor between May 15, 2019, and August 11, 2021, were consecutively enrolled in 4 hospitals in the Netherlands, including the dedicated tertiary referral center for pediatric oncology care. Exposures: A standardized and comprehensive ophthalmological examination, including orthoptic evaluation, visual acuity testing, visual field examination, and ophthalmoscopy, was performed within 4 weeks from brain tumor diagnosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were prevalence and types of visual symptoms and abnormal ophthalmological findings at brain tumor diagnosis. Results: Of 170 youths included in the study (96 [56.5%] male; median age, 8.3 years [range, 0.2-17.8 years]), 82 (48.2%) had infratentorial tumors; 53 (31.2%), supratentorial midline tumors; and 35 (20.6%), cerebral hemisphere tumors. A total of 161 patients (94.7%) underwent orthoptic evaluation (67 [41.6%] preoperatively; 94 [58.4%] postoperatively); 152 (89.4%), visual acuity testing (63 [41.4%] preoperatively; 89 [58.6%] postoperatively); 121 (71.2%), visual field examination (49 [40.4%] preoperatively; 72 [59.6%] postoperatively); and 164 (96.5%), ophthalmoscopy (82 [50.0%] preoperatively; 82 [50.0%] postoperatively). Overall, 101 youths (59.4%) presented with visual symptoms at diagnosis. Abnormal findings were found in 134 patients (78.8%) during ophthalmological examination. The most common abnormal findings were papilledema in 86 of 164 patients (52.4%) who underwent ophthalmoscopy, gaze deficits in 54 of 161 (33.5%) who underwent orthoptic evaluation, visual field defects in 32 of 114 (28.1%) with reliable visual field examination, nystagmus in 40 (24.8%) and strabismus in 32 (19.9%) of 161 who underwent orthoptic evaluation, and decreased visual acuity in 13 of 152 (8.6%) with reliable visual acuity testing. Forty-five of 69 youths (65.2%) without visual symptoms at diagnosis had ophthalmological abnormalities on examination. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study suggest that there is a high prevalence of abnormal ophthalmological findings in youths at brain tumor diagnosis regardless of the presence of visual symptoms. These findings support the need of standardized ophthalmological examination and the awareness of ophthalmologists and referring oncologists, neurologists, and neurosurgeons for ophthalmological abnormalities in this patient group.

Associations between Demographics, Tinnitus Specific-, Audiological-, General- and Mental Health Factors, and the Impact of Tinnitus on Daily Life.

Our objective was to study associations between demographics, tinnitus specific-, audiological-, general- and mental health characteristics, and impact of tinnitus in the general population. In this cross-sectional survey study in the Dutch population, data were prospectively gathered. Tinnitus impact was assessed with the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI). We included participants who experienced tinnitus and for whom a total TFI score could be calculated (n = 212). We performed univariable and multivariable regression analyses. Due to logarithmical transformation, the B-scores were back-transformed to show the actual difference in points on the TFI. People who considered hyperacusis a small problem had a 12.5-point higher TFI score, those who considered it a mediocre problem had a 17.6-point higher TFI score and those who considered it a large problem had a 24.1-point higher TFI score compared to people who did not consider hyperacusis a problem. People who indicated having minor hearing problems had a 10.5-point higher TFI score, those with mediocre hearing problems had a 20.4-point higher TFI score and those with severe hearing problems had a 41.6-point higher TFI score compared to people who did not have subjective hearing problems. In conclusion, audiological risk factors, such as hearing problems and hyperacusis, have the largest association with the impact of tinnitus on daily life, compared to other assessed variables. The results of this study can be used in future research to find targeted interventions to diminish the impact of tinnitus.