The Dental Practicality Index - to treat or not to treat.

The Dental Practicality Index (DPI) has been designed to describe, on a clinical level, the 'practicality' of restoring a tooth versus referring to secondary care or extraction.The systematic approach of DPI has been shown to improve decision-making and confidence in treatment planning when used by young dentists. In addition, there is good evidence demonstrating that it provides an accurate estimation of the outcome of treatment. The DPI enhances clinician-patient communication and ultimately the consent process.

A simple guide to using dental dam.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a major impact on the provision of dental care. The 'new normal' in primary and secondary care is to apply specific measures to reduce the potential impact of aerosol generating exposure (AGE), for example, use of appropriate personal protective equipment and fallow time after aerosol generating procedures. The use of dental dam is essential to reduce the degree of AGE and also potentially reduce fallow time.

The impact of the Dental Practicality Index on treatment planning.

Aim To compare the treatment planning decisions made by undergraduate and postgraduate dental students before and after training on the use of the Dental Practicality Index (DPI).Methodology One hundred and eight undergraduate and postgraduate dental students were randomly assigned to test (DPI) or control groups. The baseline knowledge was assessed in the first session; both groups were shown 15 clinical scenarios and asked to assign one of four treatment plan options (no treatment, simple treatment, complex treatment or extract). The most appropriate treatment plan had been agreed by a consensus panel of experienced dentists. The test group was then trained on the use of the DPI. In the second session, both groups were shown the same clinical scenarios again in a different order and asked to assign one of the four treatment plan options. Both groups completed the confidence questionnaire.Results Training with the DPI improved the test (DPI) group mean scores from 9.1 in the first session to 10.3 out of 15 in the second session, which was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.005) when compared to the control group mean scores of 8.9 in the first session to 9.2 out of 15 in the second session. The mean confidence score of the students was 6.5 out of 10. There was no correlation between self-reported confidence scores of the students and the treatment planning result scores.Conclusions The DPI aids in the systematic assessment and appropriate treatment planning of dental restorative problems by dental students.

The use of nurses' and carers' observations in the identification of poststroke depression.

AIM: This paper is a report of a study to determine the accuracy and utility of an observational screening tool (Signs of Depression Scale), when rated by nurses and carers for detecting depression in patients who have recently had a stroke. BACKGROUND: Depression following a stroke is common and adversely affects recovery and rehabilitation. Identifying depression when patients have communication and cognitive difficulties is especially problematic. Screening tools which rely solely on observation may be beneficial in this group. METHOD: A cross-sectional study of people admitted with an acute stroke compared a clinical diagnosis of depression by a psychiatrist (the gold standard) with the Signs of Depression Scale completed by nurses and carers. The agreement between nurses' and carers' ratings was also explored. Data were collected over 10 months (December 2004-October 2005). FINDINGS: Seventy-one patients were included in the study, median age 70 [inter-quartile ranges (IQR) 59-76], including 40 (56.3%) males. The psychiatrist classified 25/71 (35.2%) patients as depressed. Using the recommended cut-point of 2 or more on the Signs of Depression Scale, the nurse and carer respectively rated 27/71 (38.0%) and 18/30 (60.0%) patients as potentially depressed. The proportion of patients correctly identified as depressed by the test (sensitivity) when rated by nurses was 64%, and the proportion of patients not depressed who were correctly identified by the test (specificity) was 61%, whereas carers achieved sensitivity 90% and specificity 35%. The optimal cut-point for carers was higher at 4 or more. Inter-rater agreement on the Signs of Depression Scale between nurses and carers was fair (ICC = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.09-0.68). CONCLUSION: The Signs of Depression Scale is easily completed by clinical staff, although we found the sensitivity when completed by nurses to be low. Information from carers shows potential to improve screening and it is important for nurses to value the knowledge and skills of carers in detecting depression following a stroke. Further refinement of the Signs of Depression Scale, with accompanying research, is required.

Adverse effects of antipsychotics as outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic drugs are associated with adverse effects that can lead to poor medication adherence, stigma, distress and impaired quality of life. AIMS: To review the use of adverse effects of antipsychotic drugs as outcome measures, with a particular emphasis on methodological issues. METHOD: Review of data on adverse effects from sources including randomised controlled trials (RCTs), post-marketing surveillance and naturalistic studies. RESULTS: All have advantages and disadvantages and the best overview comes from considering all sources of data together. Adverse effects are inconsistently reported, hampering cross-study comparisons. Many outcome measures lack clinical meaning. In both naturalistic studies and RCTs adverse effects often account for less treatment discontinuation than lack of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Standardisation in the reporting of adverse effects is needed. Patients' subjective experience of medication should be given more consideration. Total discontinuation rates provide a useful global outcome measure that incorporates tolerability and efficacy as well as patient and clinician viewpoints. Patients should be informed of common side-effects prior to treatment and monitored for their occurrence during treatment.