Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Medication is a potential factor influencing frailty. However, the relationship between pharmaceutical treatments and frailty remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted the present systematic review to summarize the association between drug therapy and the risk of incident frailty in older adults. We systematically searched the MEDLINE electronic database for articles indexed between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2021, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies reporting frailty changes associated with drug therapy. A total of six RCTs and 13 cohort studies involving 211,948 participants were identified, and their treatments were categorized into six medication classes: analgesics, cardiometabolic medication, chemotherapy, central nervous system (CNS)-active medication, hormonal therapy, and nutritional supplements. While the analysis revealed that only CNS-active medications were associated with an elevated risk of frailty, other medication classes also affected frailty; however, this is not conclusively attributable to a class-wide effect.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various symptoms. However, the mechanisms of tinnitus are still uncertain, and a standardized assessment of the diagnostic criteria for tinnitus is required. We aimed to reach a consensus on diagnosing tinnitus with professional experts by conducting a Delphi study with systematic review of the literature. Methods: Twenty-six experts in managing tinnitus in Korea were recruited, and a two-round modified Delphi study was performed online. The experts evaluated the level of agreement of potential criteria for tinnitus using a scale of 1–9. After the survey, a consensus meeting was held to establish agreement on the results obtained from the Delphi process. Consensus was defined when over 70% of the participants scored 7–9 (agreement) and fewer than 15% scored 1–3 (disagreement). To analyze the responses of the Delphi survey, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Consensus was reached for 22 of the 38 statements. For the definition of tinnitus, 10 out of 17 statements reached consensus, with three statements achieving complete agreement including; 1) Tinnitus is a conscious perception of an auditory sensation in the absence of a corresponding external stimulus, 2) Tinnitus can affect one’s quality of life, and 3) Tinnitus can be associated with hearing disorders including sensorineural hearing loss, vestibular schwannoma, Meniere’s disease, otosclerosis, and others. For the classification of tinnitus, 11 out of 18 statements reached consensus. The participants highly agreed with statements such as; 1) Vascular origin is expected in pulse-synchronous tinnitus, and 2) Tinnitus can be divided into acute or chronic tinnitus. Among three statements on the diagnostic tests for tinnitus only Statement 3, “There are no reliable biomarkers for sensory or emotional factors of tinnitus.”reached consensus. All participants agreed to perform pure-tone audiometry and tinnitus questionnaires, including the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory and Tinnitus Questionnaire. Conclusion We used a modified Delphi method to establish a consensus-based definition, a classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. The expert panel reached agreement for several statements, with a high level of consensus. This may provide practical information for clinicians in managing tinnitus.

Objectives: This study aimed to present the Asia-Pacific consensus on long-term and sequential therapy for osteoporosis, offering evidence-based recommendations for the effective management of this chronic condition.The primary focus is on achieving optimal fracture prevention through a comprehensive, individualized approach. Methods: A panel of experts convened to develop consensus statements by synthesizing the current literature and leveraging clinical expertise. The review encompassed long-term anti-osteoporosis medication goals, first-line treatments for individuals at very high fracture risk, and the strategic integration of anabolic and anti resorptive agents in sequential therapy approaches. Results: The panelists reached a consensus on 12 statements. Key recommendations included advocating for anabolic agents as the first-line treatment for individuals at very high fracture risk and transitioning to anti resorptive agents following the completion of anabolic therapy. Anabolic therapy remains an option for in dividuals experiencing new fractures or persistent high fracture risk despite antiresorptive treatment. In cases of inadequate response, the consensus recommended considering a switch to more potent medications. The consensus also addressed the management of medication-related complications, proposing alternatives instead of discontinuation of treatment. Conclusions This consensus provides a comprehensive, cost-effective strategy for fracture prevention with an emphasis on shared decision-making and the incorporation of country-specific case management systems, such as fracture liaison services. It serves as a valuable guide for healthcare professionals in the Asia-Pacific region, contributing to the ongoing evolution of osteoporosis management.

Objectives: . This study was conducted to evaluate the user satisfaction, efficacy, and safety of round window (RW) vibroplasty using the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) in patients with persistent mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy. Methods: . The study included 27 patients (mean age, 58.7 years; age range, 28–76 years; 11 men and 16 women) with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy from 15 tertiary referral centers in Korea. The VSB was implanted at the RW. The Korean translation of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire and the Korean version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (K-IOI-HA) questionnaire were used to evaluate user satisfaction as the primary outcome. The secondary outcome measures were audiological test results and complication rates. Results: . The mean scores for ease of communication (61.3% to 29.7% to 30.2%), reverberation (62.1% to 43.1% to 37.4%), and background noise (63.3% to 37.7% to 34.3%) subscales of the APHAB questionnaire significantly decreased after VSB surgery. The mean K-IOI-HA scores at 3 and 6 months after surgery were significantly higher than the mean preoperative score (18.6 to 27.2 to 28.1). The postoperative VSB-aided thresholds were significantly lower than the preoperative unaided and hearing aid (HA)-aided thresholds. There was no significant difference between preoperative unaided, preoperative HA-aided, and postoperative VSB-aided maximum phonetically balanced word-recognition scores. None of the 27 patients experienced a change in postoperative bone conduction pure tone average. One patient developed temporary facial palsy and two developed surgical wound infections. Conclusion . RW vibroplasty resulted in improved satisfaction and audiological test results in patients with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy, and the complication rate was tolerable.

Objective: In 2001, the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology and the Korean Society for Schizophrenia Research developed the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Schizophrenia (KMAP-SPR 2001, revised 2006) through a consensus of expert opinion. The present study was carried out to support the second revision of the KMAP-SPR. Methods: Based on clinical guidelines and studies on the treatment of psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia, the Executive committee completed a draft of KMAP-SPR 2019. To obtain an expert consensus, a Review committee of 100 Korean psychiatrists was formed and 69 responded to a 30-item questionnaire. Based on their responses, the KMAP-SPR 2019 was finalized. Results: The revised schizophrenia algorithm now consists of 5 stages. At Stage 1, monotherapy with atypical antipsychotics was recommended by expert reviewers as the first-line strategy. At Stage 2, most reviewers recommended the use of typical or atypical antipsychotic drugs not used at Stage 1. At Stage 3, many reviewers agreed with the administration of clozapine. At Stage 4, a combination of clozapine and other agents such as antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, antidepressants, or electroconvulsive therapy was recommended. At Stage 5, most reviewers recommended combined treatment with an antipsychotic other than clozapine; and a mood stabilizer, antidepressant, or electroconvulsive therapy. At any stage, prescribing long-acting injectable antipsychotics at the discretion of the clinician was recommended. Conclusion Compared with previous versions, the KMAP-SPR 2019 now recommends using clozapine earlier in treatment-refractory schizophrenia. In addition, the use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics is now considered to be available at any stage.

OBJECTIVES: The current study covers a secondary revision of the guidelines for the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia issued by the Korean Medication Algorithm for Schizophrenia (KMAP-SCZ) 2001, specifically for co-existing symptoms and antipsychotics-related side-effects in schizophrenia patients. METHODS: An expert consensus regarding the strategies of pharmacotherapy for positive symptoms of schizophrenia, co-existing symptoms of schizophrenia, and side-effect of antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia was retrieved by responses obtained using a 30-item questionnaire. RESULTS: For the co-existing symptoms, agitation could be treated with oral or intramuscular injection of benzodiazepine or antipsychotics; depressive symptoms with atypical antipsychotics and adjunctive use of antidepressant; obsessive-compulsive symptoms with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and antipsychotics other than clozapine and olanzapine; negative symptoms with atypical antipsychotics or antidepressants; higher risk of suicide with clozapine; comorbid substance abuse with use of naltrexone or bupropion/ varenicline, respectively. For the antipsychotics-related side effects, anticholinergics (extrapyramidal symptom), propranolol and benzodiazepine (akathisia), topiramate or metformin (weight gain), change of antipsychotics to aripiprazole (hyperprolactinemia and prolonged QTc) or clozapine (tardive dyskinesia) could be used. CONCLUSION: Updated pharmacotherapy strategies for co-existing symptoms and antipsychotics-related side effects in schizophrenia patients as presented in KMAP-SCZ 2019 could help effective clinical decision making of psychiatrists as a preferable option.
Antidepressive Agents ; Antipsychotic Agents ; Aripiprazole ; Benzodiazepines ; Cholinergic Antagonists ; Clinical Decision-Making ; Clozapine ; Consensus ; Depression ; Dihydroergotamine ; Drug Therapy ; Humans ; Injections, Intramuscular ; Metformin ; Naltrexone ; Propranolol ; Psychiatry ; Schizophrenia ; Serotonin Uptake Inhibitors ; Substance-Related Disorders ; Suicide ; Varenicline