ArticleAmerican journal of audiology2024
Voices From the Field: A Quality Improvement Project for Progressive Tinnitus Management 2.0.
Article in American journal of audiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTinnitus is a common health condition in the general population, with increased prevalence among military Veterans. Tinnitus is, in fact, the most prevalent military service-connected disability. There is no cure for tinnitus, but interventions are available to help patients manage their reactions to tinnitus and reduce its functional impact. Progressive tinnitus management (PTM) is a stepped-care protocol that involves coordinated audiological and behavioral health clinical services. PTM was endorsed by national Veterans Affairs (VA) audiology leadership in 2009. Given new clinical insights and research findings since the initial rollout of PTM, it remains necessary to improve and update the protocol in response to feedback from clinicians and patients.
methodThis two-phase quality improvement project captured quantitative and qualitative feedback from VA and Department of Defense (DOD) clinicians and patients concerning PTM materials. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used to integrate the quantitative and qualitative data, and a consensus method was used to adjudicate any discrepant findings.
resultsIn Phase 1, 21 VAs and DOD clinicians and patients completed semistructured interviews and quantitative measures on the PTM handbook and workbook revisions. Phase 1 findings were recommendations to modify content, format, and adaptations of content (e.g., electronic formats with a clickable index). In Phase 2, six non-Veteran patients assisted in pilot testing PTM PowerPoint slides used by clinicians for PTM skills education sessions. Phase 2 findings indicated that the revised PTM PowerPoint slides were useful and clinically acceptable.
conclusionsFindings from this study are being used to revise and update materials in the PTM skills education sessions. More generally, the study demonstrates the necessity of end-user input to inform and implement clinical updates. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.27057691.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.