Misophonia is a newly recognised sound sensitivity disorder with clinically significant symptoms affecting up to 18% of the population. It is characterised by extreme negative reactions to specific sounds which are often repetitive and generated by the human oral-nasal tract (eg, sniffing and eating sounds). Although misophonia currently has no standard treatment, research suggests that transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) holds promise therapeutically. This study aims to investigate both the effects of 4 weeks taVNS (compared with sham) on misophonia and related symptoms as well as its underlying neurophysiological mechanisms. To our knowledge, this is the first trial on taVNS in misophonia.

This is a single-centre double-blind sham-controlled trial in which 60 participants with clinically significant misophonia are randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive taVNS or sham stimulation. The intervention will be self-administered over 4 weeks (two times per day for 30 mins each). The primary efficacy outcome is self-reported misophonia severity with secondary outcomes, including mental health and audiological symptoms. In addition, all participants will undergo preintervention and postintervention testing, including MRI and physiology to investigate neurophysiological mechanisms underlying taVNS effects.

The study has been approved by the Brighton and Sussex Medical School ethics board (ER/GLP28/4). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Data will be anonymised and made available for sharing after completion of the study.

This trial is registered in ISRCTN; ISRCTN79500062.

To describe current levels of interest and action around decarbonisation in general practice settings, and awareness and use of currently available materials designed to support general practice teams undertake decarbonisation activity.

Cross-sectional, mixed methods, online survey.

473 general practices in three Integrated Care Board regions in England.

Multiprofessional general practice staff.

There were 328 responses from 163 (34.5%) practices. Most respondents were general practitioner (GP) partners (98; 29.9%), other clinical staff (93; 28.3%) or managerial staff (76; 23.2%). 229 (69.8%) respondents felt that acting to reduce carbon emissions from primary care is a legitimate part of general practice activity. However, only 44 (13.4%) felt that there is sufficient training and resources to support such activity, and only 59 (18.0%) agreed that there was sufficient leadership from higher levels within the health service to enable this. 58 (35.6%) practices had a lead for sustainability, generally managerial staff (22; 37.9%) or GP partners (17; 29.3%). Compared to other practices, those with a decarbonisation lead reported increased levels of decarbonisation actions currently being undertaken (mean = 5.2 vs 3.1; t(161) = 7.7, p2=31.9, p2=32.3, p

This survey provides insight into how English general practices and their staff regard decarbonisation activities. The findings highlight the importance of leadership, resources and incentives in driving such activities and have implications for initiatives to help achieve wider decarbonisation goals in healthcare.