PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

B Mulliken

Publications and source records attributed to B Mulliken.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2002

Binge eating disorder in extreme obesity.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether extremely obese binge eating disorder (BED) subjects (BED defined by the Eating Disorder Examination) differ from their extremely obese non-BED counterparts in terms of their eating disturbances, psychiatric morbidity and health status. DESIGN: Prospective clinical comparison of BED and non-BED subjects undergoing gastric bypass surgery (GBP). SUBJECTS: Thirty seven extremely obese (defined as BMI > or = 40 kg/m(2)) subjects (31 women, six men), aged 22-58 y. MEASUREMENTS: Eating Disorder Examination 12th Edition (EDE), Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ), Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-IV (SCID-IV), Short-Form Health Status Survey (SF-36), and 24 h Feeding Paradigm. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of subjects were classified as BED (11% met full and 14% partial BED criteria) and 75% of subjects were classified as non-BED. BED (full and partial) subjects had higher eating disturbance in terms of eating concern and shape concern (as found by the EDE), higher disinhibition (as found by the TFEQ), and they consumed more liquid meal during the 24 h feeding paradigm. No difference was found in psychiatric morbidity between BED and non-BED in terms of DSM-IV Axis I diagnosis. The health status scores of both BED and non-BED subjects were significantly lower than US norms on all subscales of the SF-36, particularly the BED group. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the validity of the category of BED within a population of extremely obese individuals before undergoing GBP. BED subjects differed from their non-BED counterparts in that they had a greater disturbance in eating attitudes and behavior, a poorer physical and mental health status, and a suggestion of impaired hunger/satiety control. However, in this population of extremely obese subjects, the stability of BED warrants further study.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Cognitive therapy, nutritional therapy and their combination in the treatment of bulimia nervosa.

BACKGROUND: This study compared the effectiveness of cognitive therapy (CT), nutritional therapy (NT), the combination of cognitive and nutritional therapy (CNT), against a control condition of support group (SG) in the treatment of bulimia nervosa. METHODS: One hundred female out-patients who fulfilled DSM-III-R criteria for bulimia nervosa were randomized to the four treatment groups. NT and CT were designed to cover different areas with minimal overlap, and CNT provided all of the features of both of these treatments. The control condition was conducted in a group self-help format. Each of the treatments lasted 14 weeks. RESULTS: All three active treatments as well as SG produced significant decreases in binge/vomit episodes. Intent-to-treat analysis found CNT and CT to be significantly more effective than SG in retaining subjects in treatment and completion of study, as well as in producing greater improvements in dysfunctional attitudes and self-control. CNT was superior to SG in achieving abstinence from bulimic behaviour. NT was superior to SG only in increase of self-control. Logistic regression found that the cognitive component, whether given alone or in conjunction with NT, and higher pre-treatment self-control scores were significant predictors for both completion of study and abstinence. CONCLUSION: CT (either alone, or in combination with nutritional therapy) remains the treatment of choice for bulimia nervosa. A treatment escalation approach should be tested for the treatment of bulimia with the more intensive and less widely available CT (with or without nutritional counselling) offered after patients have failed the less intensive and more widely available support group treatment.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Prevalence of heterotopic ossification in cemented versus noncemented total hip joint replacement in patients with osteoarthrosis: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of heterotopic bone formation in cemented versus noncemented total hip joint replacement. DESIGN: A prospective randomized controlled trial. Follow-up ranged from 2 to 6 years (mean 4 years). SETTING: A university hospital. PATIENTS: Two hundred and twenty-six patients who had primary or secondary osteoarthrosis of the hip were stratified according to type of fixation, surgeon and age. Patients were randomized within strata: 112 received noncemented total hip prostheses and 114 received cemented prostheses. The 2 groups were similar with respect to age and sex. INTERVENTION: Primary total hip arthroplasty. A cemented (methylmethacrylate) or noncemented prosthesis was inserted by a lateral surgical approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The Brooker classification was used to grade heterotopic bone formation from postoperative radiographs. RESULTS: Overall, 148 (66%) hips had no heterotopic ossification, 56 (25%) were Brooker class I, 14 (6%) were class II, 8 (3%) were class III and none were class IV. In the noncemented group of patients, 76 (68%) hips had no heterotopic ossification, 25 (22%) were Brooker class I, 7 (6%) were class II, 4 (4%) were class III and none were class IV. In the cemented group of patients, 72 (63%) hips had no heterotopic ossification, 31 (27%) hips were Brooker class I, 7 (6%) were class II, 4 (4%) were class III and none were class IV. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the prevalence of heterotopic ossification between cemented and noncemented total hip replacements in patients with osteoarthrosis.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Osteolysis in cemented versus cementless acetabular components.

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, clinical trial comparing cemented with cementless total hip arthroplasty was performed to compare the prevalence and pattern of acetabular osteolysis. Both groups were similar before surgery. Acetabular components were metal-backed, titanium implants. Twenty-eight-millimeter modular femoral heads with titanium femoral stems were used. At a minimum 2-year and mean 4-year follow-up period (range, 2-6 years), 224 patients had clinical and radiographic data available. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of acetabular osteolysis between cemented (5%) and cementless (9%) fixation. With or without cement, the use of a titanium femoral head led to osteolysis within a relatively short period after surgery in almost all of the cases, although this was not significant. The pattern of acetabular osteolysis was different. Progressive osteolysis occurred predominantly in acetabular zone 1 in the cemented group and zone 2 in the cementless group. Cementless fixation of acetabular components has been advocated in an attempt to minimize osteolysis that may occur in cemented total hip arthroplasty. This study found no difference in the prevalence of acetabular osteolysis between the two groups.

Acetabulum↗
PubMed1996

Interpretation by radiologists of orthopedic total joint radiographs: is it necessary or cost-effective?

OBJECTIVE: To examine the necessity and cost-effectiveness of interpretation by radiologists of orthopedic radiographs obtained for patients who undergo total hip or knee replacement. DESIGN: A prospective study. Serial preoperative and postoperative x-ray films of the joint in patients scheduled to undergo total hip or knee joint replacement during one calendar year were interpreted by both radiology and orthopedic department staff and compared. Intraoperative findings were used to confirm the radiologic interpretation. The follow-up was 1 year. SETTING: A university teaching hospital. INTERVENTIONS: Primary or revision total hip or knee replacement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Differences in interpretation of radiographs by radiologists and orthopedic surgeons for any of the four procedures. A change in orthopedic management. RESULTS: For preoperative radiographs, there were no discrepancies between the radiologists and orthopedic surgeons with respect to primary joint replacement. For 100 revision procedures there were 15 discrepancies, but in all cases the orthopedic surgeon's interpretation proved to be correct. For the postoperative radiographs, there were no discrepancies in the group of revision hip replacements. For the other three groups there were a total of six discrepancies and in all cases the orthopedic surgeon's interpretation was correct. In two cases conditions were present that were not recognized by staff from either the radiology department or orthopedic department. CONCLUSION: Interpretation by radiologists of total joint radiographs in patients who undergo primary or revision total hip or knee replacement arthroplasty is not necessary or cost-effective.

Canada↗