scholarly journals Respective Effects of Oral Hygiene Instructions and Periodontal Nonsurgical Treatment (Debridement) on Clinical Parameters and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures with Respect to Smoking

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 2491
Author(s):  
Leila Salhi ◽  
Adelin Albert ◽  
Laurence Seidel ◽  
France Lambert
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Oral Hygiene ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Current Smoker ◽  
Nonsurgical Treatment ◽  
Clinical Parameters ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Former Smokers ◽  
Oral Hygiene Instructions

Background: Oral hygiene instructions (OHI) and periodontal nonsurgical treatment (PNST) play pivotal roles in the management of periodontitis. The study aims to discern their respective effects on periodontal clinical parameters and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods: Ninety-one patients were included, 34 non-smokers (NS), 25 former smokers (FS) and 32 current smoker (CS). Clinical parameters such as probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were collected, and the periodontal inflamed tissue area (PISA) was calculated. Clinical parameters and PROMs were recorded before and after receiving OHI, with electronic tooth brush and interdental brushes, as well as 3 months after debridement. Results: Smokers presented a significantly higher proportion of severe periodontitis (64.7%) with generalized extension (76.5%) and with a rapid rate of progression (97.1%) compared to NS and FS. OHI led to a significant decrease of PD, BOP, and PISA (p < 0.0001) only in NS and FS. Debridement reduced PD and the percentage of PD >6 mm in all groups (p < 0.0001). OHI induced significant improvement of oral hygiene, frequency of interdental cleaning, and PROMs (p < 0.0001). Further debridement induced significant additional improvement PROMs in FS and NS (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: OHI and debridement improved periodontal clinical parameters and PROMs in both NS and FS. Former smokers had comparable outcomes to non-smokers, suggesting that smoking cessation should be encouraged.

scholarly journals Defining remission in rheumatoid arthritis: does it matter to the patient? A comparison of multi-dimensional remission criteria and patient reported outcomes

Rheumatology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna L Gul ◽  
Gisella Eugenio ◽  
Thibault Rabin ◽  
Agata Burska ◽  
Rekha Parmar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Power Doppler ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
T Cell Subsets ◽  
Total Power ◽  
Clinical Parameters ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Das28 Remission

Abstract Objectives In a cross-sectional study, we evaluated the prevalence of ‘multi-dimensional remission’ (MDR) and its component parameters, assessed using objective measures in a cohort of RA patients in treatment-induced DAS28-remission, and their relationship with patient-reported outcome measures. We sought to confirm the feasibility and face validity of the MDR construct, providing a platform for future longitudinal studies in which its clinical utility might be further established. Methods 605 patients were selected from an inflammatory arthritis register using DAS28(CRP)<2.6. Demographic, clinical and patients reported outcomes (PRO) data were collected. Ultrasound power doppler synovitis (n = 364) and T-cell subsets (n = 297) were also measured. Remission using clinical parameters was defined as: tender and swollen joint count (TJC/SJC) and CRP all ⩽1; ultrasound remission: total power doppler = 0 and T cell remission: positive normalized naïve T-cell frequency. MDR was defined as the achievement of all three dimensions. Results Overall, only 53% (321/605) of the patients achieved clinical parameters, failures being mainly due to raised CRP (52%), TJC (28)>1 (37%) or SJC (28)>1 (16%). 211/364 (58%) of patients achieved ultrasound remission and 193/297 (65%) patients showed T-cell remission. Complete data were available for 231 patients. MDR was observed in only 35% and was associated with the best (lower) PRO scores (all P ⩽ 0.05 vs non-MDR) when compared with the other definitions of remission assessed. The MDR rate was similar in early and established RA patients on b-DMARDs; however, it was lower in established RA patients who received multiple cs-DMARDs (P = 0.011). Conclusions In this study, MDR, which may represent a state closer to normality, was found to occur in about a third of DAS28-remission patients and was associated with better patient-reported outcome measures. MDR could be a novel optimal treatment target, notably from a patient’s perspective. The relevance of these findings needs further assessment.

Impact of Depression on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Lumbar Spine Decompression

Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 434-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert K. Merrill ◽  
Lukas P. Zebala ◽  
Colleen Peters ◽  
Sheeraz A. Qureshi ◽  
Steven J. McAnany
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported

Preoperative Opioid Use in Patients Undergoing Common Hand Surgeries

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472097412
Author(s):  
Ali Aneizi ◽  
Dominique Gelmann ◽  
Dominic J. Ventimiglia ◽  
Patrick M. J. Sajak ◽  
Vidushan Nadarajah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Hand Surgery ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Pain Scale ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Information ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Opioid Users

Background: The objectives of this study were to determine the baseline patient characteristics associated with preoperative opioid use and to establish whether preoperative opioid use is associated with baseline patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing common hand surgeries. Methods: Patients undergoing common hand surgeries from 2015 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective orthopedic registry at a single academic institution. Medical records were reviewed to determine whether patients were opioid users versus nonusers. On enrollment in the registry, patients completed 6 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains (Physical Function, Pain Interference, Fatigue, Social Satisfaction, Anxiety, and Depression), the Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire (BMHQ), a surgical expectations questionnaire, and Numeric Pain Scale (NPS). Statistical analysis included multivariable regression to determine whether preoperative opioid use was associated with patient characteristics and preoperative scores on patient-reported outcome measures. Results: After controlling for covariates, an analysis of 353 patients (opioid users, n = 122; nonusers, n = 231) showed that preoperative opioid use was associated with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (odds ratio [OR], 2.88), current smoking (OR, 1.91), and lower body mass index (OR, 0.95). Preoperative opioid use was also associated with significantly worse baseline PROMIS scores across 6 domains, lower BMHQ scores, and NPS hand scores. Conclusions: Preoperative opioid use is common in hand surgery patients with a rate of 35%. Preoperative opioid use is associated with multiple baseline patient characteristics and is predictive of worse baseline scores on patient-reported outcome measures. Future studies should determine whether such associations persist in the postoperative setting between opioid users and nonusers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document