PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Robert A Nicholson

Publications and source records attributed to Robert A Nicholson.

17 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Psychophysiological responses of female headache sufferers and controls using a picture-viewing paradigm.

Despite the advancement of the biopsychosocial model, the interrelationship between behavioral, emotional, and physiological factors in tension-type headache (TTH) remains unclear. Using a picture-viewing paradigm, the present study investigated differences between females with TTH and controls on physiological reactivity, affective valence and arousal, and oral motor habits. In addition, the concordance between EMG activity and self-reported oral habits (i.e., proprioceptive awareness) and EMG activity and self-reported affect (i.e., affective coherence) were measured using within-subject correlations per individual and then compared between groups. Data were analyzed for 27 TTH sufferers and 27 controls who completed a questionnaire packet followed by a psychophysiological assessment consisting of 3 phases (adaptation, scheduled-viewing, recovery) with EMG activity recorded continuously at 3 sites (frontalis, corrugator, zygomatic). During the scheduled-viewing phase, participants were presented with 24 pictures designed to elicit positive, neutral, and negative affect. Compared to controls, the headache group reported elevations in pain, oral habits, and stress across the 3 phases of the assessment, along with elevations in arousal while viewing the pictures. There were no significant differences between the groups in EMG activity while viewing the pictures. Analyses on concordance revealed partial evidence for poor proprioceptive awareness and affective coherence among the headache group, although the correlations were not significantly different than the control group. These findings suggest that arousal, stress perception, and oral habits may play a role in the pathophysiology of TTH and that within-subject designs should be tested further against group designs when measuring psychophysiological concordance.

Adaptation, Physiological↗
PubMed2006

Effects of a Website designed to improve the management of migraines.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to examine the effect of using a Web-based computer program that provides personalized feedback to migraine patients, on the interactions of patients and providers. Background.-Despite the widespread availability of evidence-based migraine treatment guidelines, patients often do not receive optimal treatment to reduce migraine pain and disability. METHODS: To address these quality gaps in migraine care, we developed a Web-based computer program, to be used by migraine patients before doctor visits. The feedback is designed to prompt patients to ask questions that lead to higher quality of care. This study was conducted to examine the effect of using the program on migraine-specific doctor-patient communications. Patients were randomized to use the Website before (intervention) or after (control) a visit with their provider. The outcome measures were the migraine-specific topics discussed during the visit, measured by an exit survey after the visit. RESULTS: Fifty of 53 subjects randomized completed the postvisit measures (94%). Overall, the mean age was 42.0 years, most patients were female (86.5%), all were white, and 58.5% saw a headache specialist during their visit. Most (75.0%) reported having headaches at least once per week and 48.1% rated their headaches as "severe." Intervention patients were significantly more likely to "discuss whether you had migraine headaches or some other type of headache?" (89.3% vs 54.5%; P < .01) and to "discuss whether or not there may be a more serious cause of your headaches?" (50.0% vs 13.6%; P < .01). Intervention patients were more likely to report discussing 8 of 12 migraine-related topics more frequently and a greater overall number of topics (5.5 vs 4.3) than control patients. This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the Website may have a positive impact on migraine-specific doctor-patient communications. A larger study, including important quality of life and utilization outcomes, is warranted.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Migraine care among different ethnicities: do disparities exist?

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate whether, in a primary care setting, Caucasians (C) and African Americans (AA) with moderately to severely disabling migraines differed in regards to: utilizing the health-care system for migraine care, migraine diagnosis and treatment, level of mistrust in the health-care system, perceived communication with their physician, and perceived migraine triggers. BACKGROUND: Research has documented ethnic disparities in pain management. However, almost no research has been published concerning potential disparities in utilization, diagnosis, and/or treatment of migraine. It is also important to consider whether ethnic differences exist for trust and communication between patients and physicians, as these are essential when diagnosing and treating migraine. METHODS: Adult patients with headache (n = 313) were recruited from primary care waiting rooms. Of these, 131 (AA = 77; C = 54) had migraine, moderate to severe headache-related disability, and provided socioeconomic status (SES) data. Participants completed measures of migraine disability (MIDAS), migraine health-care utilization, diagnosis and treatment history, mistrust of the medical community, patient-physician communication (PPC), and migraine triggers. Analysis of covariance (controlling for SES and recruitment site), chi-square, and Pearson product moment correlations were conducted. RESULTS: African Americans were less likely to utilize the health-care setting for migraine treatment (AA = 46% vs. C = 72%, P < .001), to have been given a headache diagnosis (AA = 47% vs. C = 70%, P < .001), and to have been prescribed acute migraine medication (AA = 14% vs. C = 37%, P < .001). Migraine diagnosis was low for both groups, and <15% of all participants had been prescribed a migraine-specific medication or a migraine preventive medication despite suffering moderate to severe levels of migraine disability. African Americans had less trust in the medical community (P < .001, eta2 = 0.26) and less positive PPC (P < .001, eta2 = 0.11). Also, the lower the trust and communication, the less likely they were to have ever seen (or currently be seeing) a doctor for migraine care or to have been prescribed medication. CONCLUSIONS: Migraine utilization, diagnosis, and treatment were low for both groups. However, this was especially true for African Americans, who also reported lower levels of trust and communication with doctors relative to Caucasians. The findings highlight the need for improved physician and patient education about migraine diagnosis and treatment, the importance of cultural variation in pain presentation, and the importance of communication when diagnosing and treating migraine.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Allocation of patients to conditions in headache clinical trials: randomization, stratification, and treatment matching.

Assuming control over the allocation of patients to treatment conditions is a fundamental element of any comparative clinical trial. There are three critical considerations investigators must balance in choosing an allocation scheme: reducing bias in patient allocation, producing balanced patient groups across treatment arms, and reducing the likelihood of errors attributable to chance variation. The authors review the principles of three key approaches to the allocation of patients to conditions within clinical trials, and their respective advantages with regard to these critical considerations. These allocation methods include randomization, stratification, and patient-treatment matching. Randomization is fundamental to most clinical trials. Stratification is an advanced step in a systematic program of research investigating the efficacy and effectiveness of an intervention. If the trial has less than 100 per arm and there is a known prognostic factor, stratification is the best choice to ensure equal allocation across groups. Treatment matching (tailoring) attempts to match the most appropriate treatment to a specific patient based on a priori hypotheses. Two techniques used for exploring treatment matching are: patient typologies (patient profiling), and aptitude-treatment interactions. Additional details pertaining to the rationale for selecting among these various approaches to patient allocation is provided, and their methodology is summarized with specific consideration for their application within clinical trials of headache treatment.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed2005

Behavioral headache research: methodologic considerations and research design alternatives.

Behavioral headache treatments have garnered solid empirical support in recent years, but there is substantial opportunity to strengthen the next generation of studies with improved methods and consistency across studies. Recently, Guidelines for Trials of Behavioral Treatments for Recurrent Headache were published to facilitate the production of high-quality research. The present article compliments the guidelines with a discussion of methodologic and research design considerations. Since there is no research design that is applicable in every situation, selecting an appropriate research design is fundamental to producing meaningful results. Investigators in behavioral headache and other areas of research consider the developmental phase of the research, the principle objectives of the project, and the sources of error or alternative interpretations in selecting a design. Phases of clinical trials typically include pilot studies, efficacy studies, and effectiveness studies. These trials may be categorized as primarily pragmatic or explanatory. The most appropriate research designs for these different phases and different objectives vary on such characteristics as sample size and assignment to condition, types of control conditions, periods or frequency of measurement, and the dimensions along which comparisons are made. A research design also must fit within constraints on available resources. There are a large number of potential research designs that can be used and considering these characteristics allows selection of appropriate research designs.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2005

Efficacy and effectiveness approaches in behavioral treatment trials.

The objective is to clarify the distinction between efficacy and effectiveness approaches and to discuss how these approaches can be used in a complementary way in the development, evaluation, and implementation of behavioral treatments for primary headache in various settings. Efficacy studies, with an emphasis on internal validity, are experiments that evaluate treatment response in an ideal, highly controlled research environment. Despite their methodological strengths, efficacy studies are limited in their ability to estimate the treatment effects that can be expected in clinical practice settings. Effectiveness studies, with an emphasis on external validity, are outcome studies with less controls that evaluate treatment response in settings more representative of clinical practice. Effectiveness studies, however, are limited in their ability to determine the causal link between treatment and response. Based on the four-phase model used in new drug development, a three-phase linear progression model is presented for behavioral treatment studies. This model provides for pilot testing, efficacy testing, and effectiveness testing of behavioral treatments so that there is appropriate evaluation from initial promise of a developing treatment to implementation and dissemination to various treatment delivery settings.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2005

Moderators and mediators of behavioral treatment for headache.

Although work has been done establishing the efficacy of behavioral treatments for headache, almost no work has been done using appropriate methodology to evaluate what types of patients in which settings (termed "moderators") are likely to benefit from treatment and what treatment components account for treatment response (termed "mediators"). The current article provides an overview of moderators and mediators and their assessment and analysis as they pertain to clinical trials. The article also discusses the need for moderator and mediator hypotheses to be theory driven. A brief consideration of potential moderators and mediators of behavioral treatment for headache is then presented. The article concludes with a discussion of methodological issues to be addressed when conducting moderator and mediator analysis for behavioral treatment for headache.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2005

Future directions in behavioral headache research: applications for an evolving health care environment.

Three decades of research has produced effective behavioral treatments for migraine and tension-type headache, yet the full fruition of this research has not been realized. Further development and dissemination of behavioral treatments is needed to impact the large numbers of those with headache who potentially could benefit from these interventions. At the same time, an evolving health care environment challenges researchers and providers to employ greater efficiency and innovation in managing all chronic disorders. Hopefully, the recently published clinical trials guidelines for behavioral headache research will serve as a catalyst for production of quality empiricism that, in turn, will generate enhanced behavioral strategies and will optimize health care resource utilization. This article describes 10 areas of critical needs and research priorities for behavioral headache research, including: replication and extension of seminal studies using improved methodology; analysis of barriers to implementation of behavioral treatments; development of referral and treatment algorithms; behavioral compliance facilitation with medical interventions; development of a headache self-management model; integration of behavioral intervention within traditional medical practice; identification and management of comorbid psychopathology among headache patients; prevention of disease progression; analysis of behavioral therapeutic mechanisms, and development of innovative treatment formats and applications of information technologies.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2005

Guidelines for trials of behavioral treatments for recurrent headache, first edition: American Headache Society Behavioral Clinical Trials Workgroup.

Guidelines for design of clinical trials evaluating behavioral headache treatments were developed to facilitate production of quality research evaluating behavioral therapies for management of primary headache disorders. These guidelines were produced by a Workgroup of headache researchers under auspices of the American Headache Society. The guidelines are complementary to and modeled after guidelines for pharmacological trials published by the International Headache Society, but they address methodologic considerations unique to behavioral and other nonpharmacological treatments. Explicit guidelines for evaluating behavioral headache therapies are needed as the optimal methodology for behavioral (and other nonpharmacologic) trials necessarily differs from the preferred methodology for drug trials. In addition, trials comparing and integrating drug and behavioral therapies present methodological challenges not addressed by guidelines for pharmacologic research. These guidelines address patient selection, trial design for behavioral treatments and for comparisons across multiple treatment modalities (eg, behavioral vs pharmacologic), evaluation of results, and research ethics. Although developed specifically for behavioral therapies, the guidelines may apply to the design of clinical trials evaluating many forms of nonpharmacologic therapies for headache.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2005

Distinguishing bipolar depression, major depression, and schizophrenia with the MMPI-2 clinical and content scales.

Clinical and content scales from the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) were used to examine the capacity of these scales to assist in the differential diagnosis of a sample of 212 psychiatric patients-137 with major depression; 43 with schizophrenia; and 32 with bipolar disorder, depressed state. Consistent with the previous literature, the clinical scales Depression (D), and Schizophrenia (Sc), and the content scales Depression (DEP), and Low Self-Esteem (LSE) best distinguished major depression from schizophrenia; the content scale DEP proved to be the most powerful predictor in distinguishing bipolar depression from schizophrenia. No clinical or content scale proved to be effective in distinguishing patients with bipolar depression from patients with major depression. In general, the content scales outperformed the clinical scales.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Comparing demographic, health status and psychosocial strategies of audience segmentation to promote physical activity.

The goal of audience segmentation is to identify population subgroups that are homogeneous with respect to certain variables associated with a given outcome or behavior. When such groups are identified and understood, targeted intervention strategies can be developed to address their unique characteristics and needs. This study compares the results of audience segmentation for physical activity that is based on either demographic, health status or psychosocial variables alone, or a combination of all three types of variables. Participants were 1090 African-American and White adults from two public health centers in St Louis, MO. Using a classification-tree algorithm to form homogeneous groups, analyses showed that more segments with greater variability in physical activity were created using psychosocial versus health status or demographic variables and that a combination of the three outperformed any individual set of variables. Simple segmentation strategies such as those relying on demographic variables alone provided little improvement over no segmentation at all. Audience segmentation appears to yield more homogeneous subgroups when psychosocial and health status factors are combined with demographic variables.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Cognitive-behavioral group treatment for disabling headache.

OBJECTIVES: Severe, disabling headache is costly to individual sufferers, through pain and reduced functioning, and to society, through decreased work productivity and increased health care use. First-line prophylactic agents combined with triptans do not adequately benefit many disabled headache sufferers. We sought to investigate whether a cognitive-behavioral treatment targeting the psychological and behavioral factors that contribute to disabling headache may provide additional benefit and whether using a group format may provide a more intensive clinic-based treatment without increasing the cost of service delivery. DESIGN: We developed and piloted a cognitive-behavioral group treatment for chronic, disabling headache. We evaluated its effectiveness in decreasing headache, reducing symptomatic medication use, and improving quality of life. SETTING: A behavioral headache management program of an academic medical center. PATIENTS: Sixty-two individuals suffering from primary headache disorder with moderate to severe headache-related disability who completed treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Individuals completed a pretreatment evaluation, the 10-session cognitive-behavioral group treatment, and a 1-month-posttreatment evaluation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The impacts of treatment on headache (frequency, intensity, and duration), medication use, and quality of life were assessed. RESULTS: Separate multivariate analyses of variance revealed significant improvements in headache, symptomatic medication use, and quality of life. Overall, 50% of participants experienced at least a 50% reduction in headache frequency from pre- to posttreatment. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide preliminary evidence that delivering a clinic-based, group-format cognitive-behavioral treatment to moderately to severely disabled headache sufferers can decrease headache activity, reduce symptomatic medication use, and improve quality of life.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

EMG reactivity and oral habits among young adult headache sufferers and painfree controls in a scheduled-waiting task.

Previous research has shown that patients with facial pain exhibit a pattern of physiological and behavioral reactivity to scheduled-waiting tasks that may help account for the development of facial pain. The present study extended this line of research by examining the psychophysiological reactivity of headache sufferers in a similar task. A total of 34 frequent headache sufferers screened by International Headache Society (IHS) criteria and 13 painfree controls completed a psychophysiological assessment consisting of 4 phases (adaptation, free-play, scheduled-play, and recovery) that included a scheduled-waiting condition (scheduled-play) designed to produce adjunctive behavior. Masseter and frontalis EMG were measured continuously during each phase and self-reported oral habits and pain ratings were collected following each phase. A significant interaction and group effect was found on frontalis EMG, with the headache group exhibiting elevated EMG levels across the phases, whereas the control group exhibited increasing EMG levels that peaked during the scheduled-play phase. Only a significant phase effect was found on masseter EMG, with the highest EMG levels recorded during the scheduled-play phase for both groups. In addition, a significant phase effect was found on self-reported oral habits data. Overall, these results provide general support for the adjunctive behavior effect, but the predicted difference in magnitude between the groups was not found.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Differences in anger expression between individuals with and without headache after controlling for depression and anxiety.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether anger and anger expression are different between persons with and without headache after controlling for depression and anxiety. BACKGROUND: Persons with headache may experience more problems with anger and its expression when compared with persons without headache. It is important to establish whether differences exist for persons with and without headache on trait anger and anger expression independent of depression and anxiety. To date, however, this issue has received little attention in the empirical literature. The current study measured trait anger, anger-in, hostility, anxiety, and depression among persons with and without headache, and evaluated whether trait anger and anger-in differentiated groups independent of depression and anxiety. METHODS: Participants were 422 adults recruited from a larger study within a university setting. Of those, 171 suffered from headache (mean age, 21 years; 81% were female; 69% were white; mean years with pain, 7.53). Another 251 sex-matched individuals (mean age, 21 years; 81% female; 62% white) met criteria for the headache-free group. Participants provided information regarding their headache characteristics and were administered affective trait measures (Trait version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Brief Symptom Inventory-Depression), trait anger measures (Trait Anger Scale, Cook-Medley Hostility Scale), and a measure of the extent to which individuals hold their anger in. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis of variance revealed significant differences between the 2 groups (Wilks lambda =.86, P <.001, eta2 =.14). Step-down analysis revealed that even after controlling for all other variables, those in the headache group had higher levels of anger-in (P <.001, eta2 =.08; mean, 18.98 versus 15.68). Trait anger and hostility did not differ between groups after controlling for depression and anxiety. Logistic regression revealed that anger-in contributed most to predicting headache status (P <.001; partial r =.23). CONCLUSIONS: The current findings indicate that persons with headache hold their anger in more than those without headache even after controlling for levels of trait anger, depression, and anxiety. However, after controlling for depression and anxiety, individuals no longer differed on trait anger. Also, anger-in was the strongest predictor of headache. The current findings suggest that holding anger in is more common among headache sufferers. Given recent findings regarding the negative effect of holding anger in among persons with pain conditions, this may be an important factor to evaluate when considering psychological/emotional factors affecting headache.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

The predictive capacity of the MMPI-2 and PAI validity scales and indexes to detect coached and uncoached feigning.

The objective of this study was to examine the relative effectiveness of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) validity scales and indexes to detect malingering. Research participants were either informed (coached) or not informed (uncoached) about the presence and operating characteristics of the validity scales and instructed to fake bad on both the MMPI-2 and PAI. The validity scale and index scores produced by these research participants were then compared to those scores from a bona fide sample of psychiatric patients (n = 75). Coaching had no effect on the ability of the research participants to feign more successfully than those participants who received no coaching. For the MMPI-2, the Psychopathology F scale, or F(p), proved to be the best at distinguishing psychiatric patients from research participants instructed to malinger, although the other F scales (i.e., F and Fb) were also effective. For the PAI, the Rogers Discriminant Function index (RDF) was clearly superior to the other PAI fake-bad validity indicators; neither the Negative Impression Management scale nor Malingering Index were effective at detecting malingered profiles in this study. Overall, RDF proved to be marginally superior to F and F(p) in distinguishing MMPI-2 and PAI protocols produced by research participants asked to malinger and psychiatric patients. Both the RDF and the F and F(p) scales, however, were able to increase the predictive capability of one another.

Adult↗
PubMed1991

Competent and incompetent criminal defendants: a quantitative review of comparative research.

Thirty studies comparing competent and incompetent criminal defendants (N = 8,170) were quantitatively reviewed to identify variables associated with judgments about defendants' competency to stand trial. Effect sizes reflecting the magnitude of the relationship between competency status and defendant characteristics were derived and averaged across studies. The characteristics most strongly related to incompetency were (a) poor performance on psychological tests or interviews specifically designed to assess defendants' legally relevant functional abilities, (b) a psychotic diagnosis, and (c) psychiatric symptoms reflective of severe psychopathology. To a lesser degree, traditional psychological tests, previous psychiatric hospitalization, previous legal involvement, marital resources, and demographic characteristics were also related to competency status. Although these results are generally consistent with the legal standard for competency to stand trial, some of the correlates of competency may reflect potential biases in the decision-making process. Limitations of existing research and directions for future inquiry are discussed.

Antisocial Personality Disorder↗