Periodontitis from the patient's perspective, a qualitative study.

UNLABELLED: Periodontitis is an infectious disease that impacts people's oral health and can lead to the loss of teeth. There are several factors that explain why some people develop this disease. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to describe patients' perceptions of living with periodontitis. METHOD: A qualitative method inspired by phenomenography was chosen, because the focal point was the patients' perceptions of this phenomenon. A total of 10 patients, all of whom were being treated at a specialist clinic for periodontology in the south of Sweden, were interviewed. RESULTS: Two main categories were identified: perceptions of disease and perceptions of having the disease under control, together with subcategories. The first category highlights the patients' perception of what causes periodontitis, being given the diagnosis, after the diagnosis and the consequences of periodontitis. The other main category highlights the patients' perception of their own responsibility and the professionals' responsibility. The patients' oral health-related quality of life had been influenced by periodontitis. There is no guarantee that the patient has understood what is actually required of him/her during treatment, despite information about the diagnosis. It can often take some time for patients to understand the nature of their disease. CONCLUSION: Acceptance and control of the disease result in less inconvenience in the patients' daily lives. It creates an optimistic future perspective, despite feelings of anxiety about facing consequences such as tooth loss.

Nosocomial hepatitis C in a thoracic surgery unit; retrospective findings generating a prospective study.

We describe the transmission of hepatitis C virus (HCV) to two patients from a thoracic surgeon who was unaware of his hepatitis C infection. By partial sequencing of the non-structural 5B gene and phylogenetic analysis, the viruses from both patients were found to be closely related to genotype 1a strain from the surgeon. Two further hepatitis C cases were found in relation to the thoracic clinic. Their HCV sequences were related to each other but were of genotype 2b and the source of infection was never revealed. To elucidate the magnitude of the problem, we conducted a prospective study for a period of 17 months in which patients who were about to undergo thoracic surgery were asked to participate. Blood samples were drawn prior to surgery and at least four months later. The postoperative samples were then screened for anti-HCV and, if positive, the initial sample was also analysed. The only two patients (0.4%) identified were confirmed anti-HCV positive before surgery, and none out of 456 evaluable cases seroconverted to anti-HCV during the observation period. Despite the retrospectively identified cases, nosocomial hepatitis C is rare in our thoracic unit. The study points out the risk of transmission of hepatitis C from infected personnel and reiterates the need for universal precautions.

A descriptive study of blood exposure incidents among healthcare workers in a university hospital in Sweden.

In an attempt to document blood exposure incidents and compliance with recommended serological investigations, universal precautions and incident reporting routines, data was collected from occupational injury reports during a two-year period. In addition, a sample of healthcare workers (HCWs) answered a questionnaire about blood tests and work routines. In a third part of the study some HCWs were asked about the type and actual frequency of incidents, together with the number of reported incidents during the two-year study period. Of a total of 473 reported occupational blood exposures, the majority came from nurses and the minority from physicians. Most reported incidents occurred on hospital wards. The most common incidents were needlestick injuries, and 35% occurred when the needle was recapped. Medical laboratory technicians (MLT) reported significantly more mucocutaneous incidents than other professionals (P < 0.01). In 10% of the incidents, the patient had a known blood-borne infection. Serological investigations post-exposure varied among professional groups, and 35% were not tested. No seroconversion was shown in the HCWs tested. In the third part of the study, respondents recalled 1180 incidents, although only 9% of these had been reported. The majority occurred in operating theatres, and in connection with anaesthesia. There was a significant difference (P < 0.001) between the different professional groups with regard to the frequency of incident reporting. Physicians reported only 3% and MLTs 36% of the incidents. Eighty-one percent believed that the accident could have been avoided. Despite knowledge of universal precautions, professionals continue to behave in a risky manner, which can result in blood exposure incidents.