Dr. Karishma S Chhabria

Background
Although the association between mental disorder and metabolic syndrome as a bidirectional relationship has been demonstrated, there is little knowledge of the cumulative and individual effect of these conditions on peripartum mental health. This study aims to investigate the association between metabolic syndrome conditions (MetS-C) and maternal mental illness in the perinatal period, while exploring time to incident mental disorder diagnosis in postpartum women.

Methods
This observational study identified perinatal women continuously enrolled 1 year prior to and 1 year post-delivery using Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database (CDM) from 2014 to 2019 with MetS-C i.e. obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, high triglycerides, or low HDL (1-year prior to delivery); perinatal comorbidities (9-months prior to and 4-month postpartum); and mental disorder (1-year prior to and 1-year post-delivery). Additionally, demographics and the number of days until mental disorder diagnosis were evaluated in this cohort. The analysis included descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression. MetS-C, perinatal comorbidities, and mental disorder were assessed using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth, and Tenth Revision diagnosis codes.

Results
372,895 deliveries met inclusion/exclusion criteria. The prevalence of MetS-C was 13.43%. Multivariable logistic regression revealed prenatal prevalence (1.64, CI = 1.59–1.70) and postpartum incident (1.30, CI = 1.25–1.34) diagnosis of mental health disorder were significantly higher in those with at least one MetS-C. Further, the adjusted odds of having postpartum incident mental illness were 1.51 times higher (CI = 1.39–1.66) in those with 2 MetS-C and 2.12 times higher (CI = 1.21–4.01) in those with 3 or more MetS-C. Young women (under the age of 18 years) were more likely to have an incident mental health diagnosis as opposed to other age groups. Lastly, time from hospital discharge to incident mental disorder diagnosis revealed an average of 157 days (SD = 103 days).

Conclusion
The risk of mental disorder (both prenatal and incident) has a significant association with MetS-C. An incremental relationship between incident mental illness diagnosis and the number of MetS-C, a significant association with younger mothers along with a relatively long period of diagnosis mental illness highlights the need for more screening and treatment during pregnancy and postpartum.

Background: Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing chemo/radiation (C/RT) commonly experience severe and persistent distress associated with treatment related fear and physical side effects such as xerostomia, dysphagia, and dryness of mouth. Cortisol, a stress sensitive hormone, can be easily measured in saliva to reflect biobehavioral responses to such stressors. Unfortunately, it has not been used in this population due to concerns associated with C/RT related xerostomia.

Methods: In a proof-of-concept study, we explored the feasibility of collecting salivary cortisol as a marker of fear and distress in HNC patients. Ten HNC subjects undergoing C/RT provided saliva samples for 3 consecutive days across three timepoints (pre-treatment, 3-weeks and 1-month post-treatment) and completed concurrent depression, anxiety and swallowing related fear measures.

Results: Salivary cortisol collection adherence was between 60-80%. It was not impacted by xerostomia. Diurnal cortisol pattern's demonstrated dysregulation at pretreatment in 62%, and flattened aberrant slopes continued at 3-weeks and beyond in 50% of subjects.

Conclusions: Our study supports the feasibility and utility of salivary cortisol measurement in HNC patients across the treatment trajectory. Diurnal cortisol measures may be a valuable tool to detect and monitor treatment distress during C/RT in this population.

Background
Fear is an under‐recognized issue in intervention adherence in head and neck cancer (HNC). We developed and validated a patient reported outcome for swallowing fear in HNC patients.
Methods
Items were adapted from the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia to swallowing function. A beta version was completed by 51 HNC patients undergoing chemo +/− radiotherapy at baseline and post‐treatment. Psychometric and factor structure analyses were applied.
Results
Swallowing Kinesiophobia Scale (SWKS) demonstrated strong face and content validity, internal consistency, and test‐retest reliability. Factor analysis revealed three‐factors: somatic factor, swallow avoidance, and fear of harm. Factors correlated positively with depression score, worry scale, and anxiety and pain scales. Score differences between patient subgroups (dysphagic vs nondysphagic) confirmed discriminative validity.
Conclusion
The SWKS is a psychometrically valid tool to identify patients with fear of swallowing and swallowing‐related movement. It can help identify patients early in treatment who may need additional support.

Objective
Oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) incidence is rapidly increasing, as are survival rates, in large part due to the human papillomavirus (HPV). Treatment intensity, however, has remained unchanged, making treatment‐related toxicity (i.e., dysphagia) a critical problem for an increasing number of patients. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether pretreatment objective swallowing measures can predict percutaneous fluoroscopic guided gastrostomy tube (PFG) utilization during OPSCC treatment.
Methods
Forty‐one newly diagnosed OPSCC patients treated with radiation underwent evaluation of swallow function with modified barium swallow study (MBSS) prior to and at completion of radiation treatment using the Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST); a subset of patients were evaluated using the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI).
Results
Patients were male (100%), primarily Caucasian (85.4%) and p16 positive (85.4%) with mean age of 65.7 years. PFG were placed in 70.7% patients (n = 29) and used by 63.4% (n = 26). Pre‐ and post‐treatment DIGEST scores were associated with T‐classification (t = −2.9, p = .001, t = −2.7, p = .01) and indicated deteriorating swallow function during treatment (mean change = 0.46 [t = −2.7, p = .01]). DIGEST and MDADI scores were generally not associated with patient PFG utilization. DIGEST and MDADI scores were significantly correlated prior to, but not following completion of treatment.
Conclusion
Pre‐treatment DIGEST and patient reported swallowing outcomes (MDADI) can be useful in identifying patients with unsafe and/or grossly inefficient swallowing function. However, objectively measured swallow function was not associated with PFG utilization. Development of PFG placement algorithms (reactive vs. prophylactic) therefore require additional inputs/metrics.
Level of Evidence
4 Laryngoscope, 130:2153–2159, 2020

Background: Technology-mediated obesity treatments are commonly affected by poor long-term adherence. Supportive Accountability Theory suggests that the provision of social support and oversight toward goals may help to maintain adherence in technology-mediated treatments. However, no tool exists to measure the construct of supportive accountability.

Objective: This study aimed to develop and psychometrically validate a supportive accountability measure (SAM) by examining its performance in technology-mediated obesity treatment.

Methods: Secondary data analyses were conducted in 2 obesity treatment studies to validate the SAM (20 items). Study 1 examined reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity using an exploratory factor analysis in individuals seeking obesity treatment. Study 2 examined the construct validity of SAM in technology-mediated interventions involving different self-monitoring tools and varying amounts of phone-based interventionist support. Participants received traditional self-monitoring tools (standard, in-home self-monitoring scale [SC group]), newer, technology-based self-monitoring tools (TECH group), or these newer technology tools plus additional phone-based support (TECH+PHONE group). Given that the TECH+PHONE group involves more interventionist support, we hypothesized that this group would have greater supportive accountability than the other 2 arms.

Results: In Study 1 (n=353), the SAM showed strong reliability (Cronbach α=.92). A factor analysis revealed a 3-factor solution (representing Support for Healthy Eating Habits, Support for Exercise Habits, and Perceptions of Accountability) that explained 69% of the variance. Convergent validity was established using items from the motivation for weight loss scale, specifically the social regulation subscale (r=0.33; P<.001) and social pressure for weight loss subscale (r=0.23; P<.001). In Study 2 (n=80), the TECH+PHONE group reported significantly higher SAM scores at 6 months compared with the SC and TECH groups (r=0.45; P<.001). Higher SAM scores were associated with higher adherence to weight management behaviors, including higher scores on subscales representing healthy dietary choices, the use of self-monitoring strategies, and positive psychological coping with weight management challenges. The association between total SAM scores and percent weight change was in the expected direction but not statistically significant (r=-0.26; P=.06).

Conclusions: The SAM has strong reliability and validity across the 2 studies. Future studies may consider using the SAM in technology-mediated weight loss treatment to better understand whether support and accountability are adequately represented and how supportive accountability impacts treatment adherence and outcomes.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01999244; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01999244

Teamwork, an interprofessional competency, lends itself toward behaviorally based assessments. Peer assessment within interprofessional education is one method to determine how an individual's team skills are perceived by others on a team. Peer assessment has been used in numerous learning contexts to evaluate professionalism, including the health sciences. Yet there appears to be few, if any reports, regarding peer assessment of learners collaborating as an interprofessional team. We used the Comprehensive Assessment of Team-Member Effectiveness (CATME), an online teamwork survey application to facilitate self and peer teamwork assessments within the context of a large, required, interprofessional service-learning program at the University of Florida. This paper describes the validation of CATME for use among health sciences students. Data from 1351 students was collected across two academic years, 2014–2015 and 2015–2016, related to three behavioral characteristics, and measures of team satisfaction and psychological safety. Statistical procedures employed included an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and item analysis. Results provided evidence that 90% of the variance was explained by a single factor solution. Our validation substantiates that CATME is a suitable tool for the formative evaluation of teamwork behaviors in clinical health science programs but could be further refined to improve itself usability.

To describe caregiving and relationship challenges in cancer and the state of the science of dyadic interventions that target survivors and caregivers.
Narrative review.
Viewing the survivor-caregiver dyad as the unit of care may improve multiple aspects of survivor and caregiver quality of life. However, several questions remain regarding how, why, and for whom dyadic interventions are effective.
Nurses should consider survivor, caregiver, and relationship needs when formulating supportive care protocols. Screening for survivor distress and extending distress screening to caregivers is an important first step in providing comprehensive psychosocial care.

Background Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) experience significant physical and psychological morbidity during radiotherapy (RT) that contributes to treatment interruptions and a poor quality of life. Although spouses/partners can help by encouraging patient self-management (eg, self-care) during RT, they often experience high psychological distress rates, lack basic health care knowledge and skills, and report increased marital conflict regarding patient self-management. The current pilot study examined the feasibility and acceptability of a 6-session telephone-based intervention called Spouses coping with the Head And neck Radiation Experience (SHARE), which teaches self-management, communication, and coping skills to patients with HNC and their spouses. The treatment effects of SHARE compared with usual medical care (UMC) in controlling patient physical symptoms and improving patient/spouse psychological and marital functioning also were examined. MethodsThirty patients who initiated RT and their spouses (60 participants; 40% of whom were racial/ethnic minorities) were randomized to SHARE or UMC, and preintervention and postintervention assessments were completed. ResultsSolid recruitment (70%) and low attrition rates (7%) demonstrated feasibility. Strong program evaluations and homework completion rates (72%) supported acceptability. Significant treatment effects (medium in magnitude) were observed for SHARE compared with UMC with regard to HNC-specific physical symptom burden (Cohen's d, -0.89) and symptom interference (Cohen's d, -0.86). Medium to large effects favoring SHARE also were found for patient and spouse depressive symptoms (Cohen's d, -0.84) and cancer-specific distress (Cohen's d, -1.05). Conclusions The findings of the current study support the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of SHARE. They also suggest that programs that empower HNC couples with the necessary skills to coordinate care and manage the challenges of RT together hold great promise for controlling a patient's physical symptoms and improving the psychological functioning of both partners.

Evidence suggests that community dwelling older adults (CDOA) are at risk for dysphagia (swallowing difficulties). Dysphagia is often unidentified until related morbidities like under nutrition or pneumonia occur. These cases of unidentified dysphagia, prior to any clinical intervention, may be termed 'pre-clinical dysphagia'. Identifying pre-clinical dysphagia is challenged by the lack of validated tools appropriate for CDOA. This study addresses preliminary development of a novel patient reported outcome (PRO) screening tool for pre-clinical dysphagia. Initially, 34 questions were developed from literature review and expert opinion. Following pilot testing (n = 53), the questionnaire was revised and tested on 335 additional CDOA. Face validity, content validity, item analysis, reliability (internal consistency), and construct validity (exploratory factor analysis) measures were completed. Psychometric validation resulted in a 17-question PRO tool. Construct analysis identified a three-factor model that explained 67.345% of the variance. Emergent factors represented swallowing effort, physical function, and cognitive function. The results revealed strong construct validity and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90). A novel, simple PRO incorporating multiple function domains associated with aging demonstrated strong preliminary psychometric properties. This tool is more comprehensive and aging-focused than existing dysphagia screening tools. Inclusion of multiple domains may be key in early identification of pre-clinical dysphagia.

Objective: The Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) is a 20-item tool developed to screen for depression in the general population. To psychometrically evaluate and validate the CES-D scale for use in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients.
Methods: The CES-D was applied to 130 subjects at onset of radiation treatment and 3-months following treatment. Analysis was conducted via face and content validity using two expert raters, internal consistency was applied using Cronbach's alpha, test retest reliability comparing baseline to 3-month application, concurrent validity was performed against the FACT-H&N and Pain Disability Index, construct validity was conducted via exploratory factor analysis.
Results: The sample was predominantly male receiving chemo radiation. Face validity was strong (alpha = 0.85). Significant difference was found in the mean score between depressed (CES-D cut point=16) vs. non-depressed (t= -15.84, p =. 00) (95% CI = -17.18, - 13.33). Internal consistency of the scale was high (alpha= 0.84). Test retest reliability (p <.001) showed moderate-strong correlations (0.51), however was not sensitive to change in this sample across the study time period. Concurrent validity was strong (r=-0.77, 0.51). Factor analysis at baseline explained 54.92% of variance, with 3 distinct factors; depressed affect, somatic/retarded activity, and positive affect. In contrast to general populations, the factor 'disturbed interpersonal skill' was not retained.
Conclusion: Results confirm the reliability and validity of the CES-D as a measure of depression in HNC populations. Proposed cut off scores remain stable but scale responsiveness suggests caution when evaluating change over time in this population.