Mother to Infant Transmission of Hepatitis B Virus in the Face of Neonatal Immunization Is Not Necessarily Primary Vaccine Failure.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance programs undertaken in infants born to mothers with hepatitis B virus (HBV) provide an opportunity to analyze virological markers from the neonate and early infancy. These data inform on mechanisms of HBV transmission and how available interventions can be better used for control of HBV infections arising at the mother/child interface. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of HBV serological markers was undertaken in dried blood spots collected from infants born to mothers infected with HBV. In addition, molecular analysis was performed in newborn blood spot cards, collected after birth, from infants identified as infected with HBV despite receiving prophylaxis. RESULTS: Perinatal exposure could not account for all transmissions, with at least one-quarter (22%) of infants already infected in utero. All harbored a wild-type hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), with identical sequences noted in the neonatal and early infancy samples. In contrast, in infants infected perinatally (43%), selection of viruses harboring amino acid changes in the HBsAg were common (80% of sequences) and divergent from the linked maternal sample. CONCLUSION: Currently considered to represent vaccine failure, it is likely that a proportion of HBV infections result from in utero acquisition. These infections are unlikely to be susceptible to postnatal prophylaxis, and current recommendations for maternal antiviral treatment may be too late to prevent transmission. Consideration should be given to the earlier use of antivirals during gestation to reduce the risk of intrauterine transmission together with completion of the immunization schedule also to reduce the perinatal risk of HBV transmission.

Epidemiology of HIV infection and associated behaviours among people who inject drugs in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland: Nearly 40 years on.

INTRODUCTION: People who inject drugs are at high risk of blood-borne infections. We describe the epidemiology of HIV among people who inject drugs in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland (EW&NI) since 1981. METHODS: National HIV surveillance data were used to describe trends in diagnoses (1981-2019), prevalence (1990-2019), and behaviours (1990-2019) among people who inject drugs aged ≥15 years in EW&NI. HIV care and treatment uptake were assessed among those attending in 2019. RESULTS: Over the past four decades, the prevalence of HIV among people who inject drugs in EW&NI remained low (range: 0.64%-1.81%). Overall, 4978 people who inject drugs were diagnosed with HIV (3.2% of cases). Diagnoses peaked at 234 in 1987, decreasing to 78 in 2019; the majority were among white men born in the UK/Europe (90%), though the epidemic diversified over time. Late diagnosis (CD4 <350 cells/µl) was common (2010-2019: 52% [429/832]). Of those who last attended for HIV care in 2019, 97% (1503/1550) were receiving HIV treatment and 90% (1375/1520) had a suppressed viral load (<200 copies/ml). HIV testing uptake has steadily increased among people who inject drugs (32% since 1990). However, in 2019, 18% (246/1404) of those currently injecting reported never testing. The proportion of people currently injecting reporting sharing needles/syringes decreased from 1999 to 2012, before increasing to 20% (288/1426) in 2019, with sharing of any injecting equipment at 37% (523/1429). CONCLUSION: The HIV epidemic among people who inject drugs in EW&NI has remained relatively contained compared with in other countries, most likely because of the prompt implementation of an effective national harm reduction programme. However, risk behaviours and varied access to preventive interventions among people who inject drugs indicate the potential for HIV outbreaks.

The impact of direct-acting antivirals on hepatitis C viraemia among people who inject drugs in England; real-world data 2011-2018.

Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for anybody with viraemic HCV infection has been scaled-up in England since 2017. To assess early impacts, we investigated trends in, and factors associated with, HCV viraemia among people who inject drugs (PWID). We also examined trends in self-reported treatment access. Bio-behavioural data from an annual, national surveillance survey of PWID (2011-2018) estimated trends in viraemic prevalence among HCV antibody-positive PWID. Multivariable logistic regression identified characteristics independently associated with viraemia. Trends in treatment access were examined for PWID with known infection. Between 2011 and 2016, viraemic prevalence among antibody-positive PWID remained stable (2011, 57.7%; 2016, 55.8%) but decreased in 2017 (49.4%) and 2018 (50.4%) (both p < 0.001). After adjustment for demographic and behavioural characteristics, there remained significant reduction in viraemia in 2017 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.94) and 2018 (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.93) compared to 2016. Other factors associated with viraemia were male gender (aOR 1.68, 95% CI 1.53-1.86), geographical region, injecting in past year (aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13-1.41), imprisonment (aOR 1.14, 95% CI 1.04-1.31) and homelessness (aOR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04-1.31). Among non-viraemic PWID with known infection, the proportion reporting ever receiving treatment increased in 2017 (28.7%, p < 0.001) and 2018 (38.9%, p < 0.001) compared to 2016 (14.5%). In conclusion, there has been a small reduction in HCV viraemia among antibody-positive PWID in England since 2016, alongside DAA scale-up, and some indication that treatment access has improved in the same period. Population-level monitoring and focus on harm reduction is critical for achieving and evaluating elimination.

Robust antibody responses in 70-80-year-olds 3 weeks after the first or second doses of Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, United Kingdom, January to February 2021.

Sera were collected from 185 adults aged ≥ 70 years in London to evaluate the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines. A single dose of Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine resulted in > 94% seropositivity after 3 weeks in naïve individuals using the Roche Spike antibody assay, while two doses produced very high spike antibody levels, significantly higher than convalescent sera from mild-to-moderate PCR-confirmed adult cases. Our findings support the United Kingdom's approach of prioritising the first dose and delaying the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine.

Psychological support for orthognathic patients: Who is doing what?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate: (1) orthodontists' training experience in the psychological assessment of orthognathic patients and their wish for training/further training; (2) the availability of psychological support, referral patterns and outcomes after referral; (3) and adverse incidents prompting orthodontists to refer patients for psychological assessment. DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: A 25-item questionnaire was designed to investigate the above mentioned aims. After a pilot study, the questionnaire was distributed to all members of the Consultant Orthodontist Group, British Orthodontic Society. RESULTS: Based on a 29.1% response rate (n = 102), 76.5% of respondents had undertaken training in identifying orthognathic patients who may benefit from psychological assessment. However, 90.2% favoured further training. All respondents believed that some orthognathic patients would benefit from referral; however, 31.3% of units referred no patients at all, mostly due to limited/no access (66.7%). Most referrals (68.9%) were to psychiatrists/psychologists with dentofacial deformity expertise, with 28.9% of units having such services onsite (14 different units). Psychological referrals had potentially useful outcomes, with 36.4% of respondents sometimes changing treatment plans following referral. Clinical incidents were experienced by 35.1% of respondents, prompting referral of patients for psychological assessment; such incidents included patient suicides (n = 4). CONCLUSION: Most respondents had trained in psychological assessment of orthognathic patients; however there was a large demand for further training. Clinicians value the psychological services available; however, limited availability may affect referrals for some respondents. Adverse incidents are of real concern and highlight the need to ensure that training and resources are provided to support orthognathic patients and teams.

A comparison of two biological markers of recent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection: implications for the monitoring of interventions and strategies to reduce HCV transmission among people who inject drugs.

BackgroundMonitoring hepatitis C virus (HCV) incidence is important for assessing intervention impact. Longitudinal studies of people who inject drugs (PWID), using repeated biological tests, are costly; alternatively, incidence can be estimated using biological markers of recent infection in cross-sectional studies.AimWe aimed to compare incidence estimates obtained from two different biological markers of recent infection in a cross-sectional study to inform monitoring approaches for HCV elimination strategies.MethodSamples from an unlinked anonymous bio-behavioural survey of PWID were tested for two recent infection markers: HCV RNA with anti-HCV negative ('RNA') and low-avidity anti-HCV with HCV RNA present ('avidity'). These two markers were used separately and in combination to estimate HCV incidence.ResultsBetween 2011 and 2013, 2,816 anti-HIV-negative PWID (25% female) who had injected during the preceding year were either HCV-negative or had one of the two markers of recent infection: 57 (2.0%) had the RNA marker and 90 (3.2%) the avidity marker. The two markers had similar distributions of risk and demographic factors. Pooled estimated incidence was 12.3 per 100 person-years (pyrs) (95% credible interval: 8.8-17.0) and not significantly different to avidity-only (p = 0.865) and RNA-only (p = 0.691) estimates. However, the RNA marker is limited by its short duration before anti-HCV seroconversion and the avidity marker by uncertainty around its duration.ConclusionBoth markers have utility in monitoring HCV incidence among PWID. When HCV transmission is high, one marker may provide an accurate estimate of incidence; when it is low or decreasing, a combination may be required.

Pilot postal birth cohort HCV Screening in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Birth cohort screening has been implemented in some countries to identify the potentially 'missed population' of undiagnosed chronic Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) in people who may not be found through targeted approaches. AIM: To determine uptake of HCV antibody testing using an oral swab screening method, overall yield, whether those testing positive had risk markers in their primary care record, and cost per case detected. DESIGN AND SETTING: Pilot screening study set in general practices in the Southwest, South London and Yorkshire and Humber. METHOD: Participants consenting were sent an oral swab kit in the post and saliva samples were tested for antibody to HCV. RESULTS: 16,436/98,396 (16.7%) patients consented and were sent an oral swab kit. 12,216 (12.4%) returned a kit, with 31 participants (yield 0.03%) testing positive for HCV antibody. 45% of those positive had a risk marker for HCV on their primary care record. Two (yield 0.002%) were confirmed RNA positive and referred for treatment, both had HCV risk markers. Cost per case detected was £16,000 per HCV antibody and £247,997 per chronic HCV. CONCLUSIONS: Wide-scale screening could be delivered and identified people infected with HCV, however most of these individuals could have been detected through lower-cost targeted screening. Yield and cost per case found were substantially worse than model estimates and targeted screening studies. Birth cohort screening should not be rolled out in primary care in England.

National and regional prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in primary and secondary school children in England: the School Infection Survey, a national open cohort study, November 2021SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence in school children.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection rates are likely to be underestimated in children because of asymptomatic or mild infections. We aim to estimate national and regional prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in primary (4-11 years old) and secondary (11-18 years old) school children between 10 November and 10 December 2021. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveillance in England using two-stage sampling, firstly stratifying into regions and selecting local authorities, then selecting schools according to a stratified sample within selected local authorities. Participants were sampled using a novel oral fluid-validated assay for SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid IgG antibodies. RESULTS: 4980 students from 117 state-funded schools (2706 from 83 primary schools, 2274 from 34 secondary schools) provided a valid sample. After weighting for age, sex, and ethnicity, and adjusting for assay accuracy, the national prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in primary school students, who were all unvaccinated, was 40.1% (95% CI 37.3-43.0). Antibody prevalence increased with age (p < 0.001) and was higher in urban than rural schools (p = 0.01). In secondary school students, the adjusted, weighted national prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 82.4% (95% CI 79.5-85.1); including 71.5% (95% CI 65.7-76.8) in unvaccinated and 97.5% (95% CI 96.1-98.5) in vaccinated students. Antibody prevalence increased with age (p < 0.001), and was not significantly different in urban versus rural students (p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: In November 2021, using a validated oral fluid assay, national SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was estimated to be 40.1% in primary school students and 82.4% in secondary school students. In unvaccinated children, this was approximately threefold higher than confirmed infections highlighting the importance of seroprevalence studies to estimate prior exposure. DATA AVAILABILITY: Deidentified study data are available for access by accredited researchers in the ONS Secure Research Service (SRS) for accredited research purposes under part 5, chapter 5 of the Digital Economy Act 2017. For further information about accreditation, contact Research.support@ons.gov.uk or visit the SRS website.

Serum HCoV-spike specific antibodies do not protect against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adolescents.

SARS-CoV-2 infections in children are generally asymptomatic or mild and rarely progress to severe disease and hospitalization. Why this is so remains unclear. Here we explore the potential for protection due to pre-existing cross-reactive seasonal coronavirus antibodies and compare the rate of antibody decline for nucleocapsid and spike protein in serum and oral fluid against SARS-CoV-2 within the pediatric population. No differences in seasonal coronaviruses antibody concentrations were found at baseline between cases and controls, suggesting no protective effect from pre-existing immunity against seasonal coronaviruses. Antibodies against seasonal betacoronaviruses were boosted in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. In serum, anti-nucleocapsid antibodies fell below the threshold of positivity more quickly than anti-spike protein antibodies. These findings add to our understanding of protection against infection with SARS-CoV-2 within the pediatric population, which is important when considering pediatric SARS-CoV-2 immunization policies.

Simple, sensitive, specific self-sampling assay secures SARS-CoV-2 antibody signals in sero-prevalence and post-vaccine studies.

At-home sampling is key to large scale seroprevalence studies. Dried blood spot (DBS) self-sampling removes the need for medical personnel for specimen collection but facilitates specimen referral to an appropriately accredited laboratory for accurate sample analysis. To establish a highly sensitive and specific antibody assay that would facilitate self-sampling for prevalence and vaccine-response studies. Paired sera and DBS eluates collected from 439 sero-positive, 382 sero-negative individuals and DBS from 34 vaccine recipients were assayed by capture ELISAs for IgG and IgM antibody to SARS-CoV-2. IgG and IgM combined on DBS eluates achieved a diagnostic sensitivity of 97.9% (95%CI 96.6 to 99.3) and a specificity of 99.2% (95% CI 98.4 to 100) compared to serum, displaying limits of detection equivalent to 23 and 10 WHO IU/ml, respectively. A strong correlation (r = 0.81) was observed between serum and DBS reactivities. Reactivity remained stable with samples deliberately rendered inadequate, (p = 0.234) and when samples were accidentally damaged or 'invalid'. All vaccine recipients were sero-positive. This assay provides a secure method for self-sampling by DBS with a sensitivity comparable to serum. The feasibility of DBS testing in sero-prevalence studies and in monitoring post-vaccine responses was confirmed, offering a robust and reliable tool for serological monitoring at a population level.

The COVID-19 Schools Infection Survey in England: Protocol and Participation Profile for a Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: One of the most debated questions in the COVID-19 pandemic has been the role of schools in SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The COVID-19 Schools Infection Survey (SIS) aims to provide much-needed evidence addressing this issue. OBJECTIVE: We present the study protocol and participation profile for the SIS study, aimed at assessing the role of schools in SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission within school settings, and investigating how transmission within and from schools could be mitigated through the implementation of school COVID-19 control measures. METHODS: SIS was a multisite, prospective, observational cohort study conducted in a stratified random sample of primary and secondary schools in selected local authorities in England. A total of 6 biobehavioral surveys were planned among participating students and staff during the 2020-2021 academic year, between November 2020 and July 2021. Key measurements were SARS-CoV-2 virus prevalence, assessed by nasal swab polymerase chain reaction; anti-SARS-CoV-2 (nucleocapsid protein) antibody prevalence and conversion, assessed in finger-prick blood for staff and oral fluid for students; student and staff school attendance rates; feasibility and acceptability of school-level implementation of SARS-CoV-2 control measures; and investigation of selected school outbreaks. The study was approved by the United Kingdom Health Security Agency Research Support and Governance Office (NR0237) and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Ethics Review Committee (reference 22657). RESULTS: Data collection and laboratory analyses were completed by September 2021. A total of 22,585 individuals-1891 staff and 4654 students from 59 primary schools and 5852 staff and 10,188 students from 97 secondary schools-participated in at least one survey. Across all survey rounds, staff and student participation rates were 45.2% and 16.4%, respectively, in primary schools and 30% and 15.2%, respectively, in secondary schools. Although primary student participation increased over time, and secondary student participation remained reasonably consistent, staff participation declined across rounds, especially for secondary school staff (3165/7583, 41.7% in round 1 and 2290/10,374, 22.1% in round 6). Although staff participation overall was generally reflective of the eligible staff population, student participation was higher in schools with low absenteeism, a lower proportion of students eligible for free school meals, and from schools in the least deprived locations (in primary schools, 446/4654, 9.6% of participating students were from schools in the least deprived quintile compared with 1262/22,225, 5.7% of eligible students). CONCLUSIONS: We outline the study design, methods, and participation, and reflect on the strengths of the SIS study as well as the practical challenges encountered and the strategies implemented to address these challenges. The SIS study, by measuring current and incident infection over time, alongside the implementation of control measures in schools across a range of settings in England, aims to inform national guidance and public health policy for educational settings. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/34075.

The impact of altered sensation affecting the lower lip after orthognathic treatment.

PURPOSE: Inferior dental nerve paresthesia is a well-known risk of orthognathic surgery, but little is known about the effects of altered sensation in day-to-day life. Therefore the aim of this study was to assess the impact of altered sensation after orthognathic treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was divided into 2 parts: the first phase involved semistructured, in-depth interviews with 13 post-treatment orthognathic patients who presented with altered sensation affecting the lower lip. In the second part of the study, the data from the interviews were used to develop a questionnaire that was distributed to 40 post-orthognathic patients (75% completion [n = 30]). The results were analyzed by use of descriptive statistical methods. RESULTS: In both stages of the study, common descriptors used to describe the altered sensation were "tingling" and "numb." The majority of patients were aware of the neurosensory disturbance when touching their lips, face, or jaw, and patients also expressed difficulties knowing when food was left on their lip. It was noted that patients who were aware of the altered sensation all of the time expressed the greatest distress in their everyday life. When it came to emotions associated with the altered sensation, the majority of patients were disappointed, but few were upset or angry. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of altered sensation due to inferior dental nerve damage after orthognathic surgery varied from patient to patient, but altered sensation had a significant effect on the majority of patients' everyday lives. The information obtained from this study makes an important contribution to the informed consent process.

A new style of orthognathic clinic.

The Orthognathic Team at the Eastman Dental Hospital has developed a new style of multidisciplinary clinic to supplement the traditional orthognathic consultation. The aim of the new clinic is to increase patient satisfaction and involvement in the consent and decision making process, as well as optimizing the information given to prospective patients regarding all aspects of this complex elective treatment. Results of a survey of patients attending the clinic found that 80% thought that the information given was 'just the right amount' and 96% were satisfied with the new structure. They particularly found it useful to meet a patient who had completed treatment. All of those who attended said that they understood the information given to them and would recommend the clinic to those considering orthognathic treatment. They also liked having other patients there with them on the clinic.

Accuracy of four lateral flow immunoassays for anti SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: a head-to-head comparative study.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are used for population surveillance and might have a future role in individual risk assessment. Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) can deliver results rapidly and at scale, but have widely varying accuracy. METHODS: In a laboratory setting, we performed head-to-head comparisons of four LFIAs: the Rapid Test Consortium's AbC-19TM Rapid Test, OrientGene COVID IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette, SureScreen COVID-19 Rapid Test Cassette, and Biomerica COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test. We analysed blood samples from 2,847 key workers and 1,995 pre-pandemic blood donors with all four devices. FINDINGS: We observed a clear trade-off between sensitivity and specificity: the IgG band of the SureScreen device and the AbC-19TM device had higher specificities but OrientGene and Biomerica higher sensitivities. Based on analysis of pre-pandemic samples, SureScreen IgG band had the highest specificity (98.9%, 95% confidence interval 98.3 to 99.3%), which translated to the highest positive predictive value across any pre-test probability: for example, 95.1% (95% uncertainty interval 92.6, 96.8%) at 20% pre-test probability. All four devices showed higher sensitivity at higher antibody concentrations ("spectrum effects"), but the extent of this varied by device. INTERPRETATION: The estimates of sensitivity and specificity can be used to adjust for test error rates when using these devices to estimate the prevalence of antibody. If tests were used to determine whether an individual has SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, in an example scenario in which 20% of individuals have antibodies we estimate around 5% of positive results on the most specific device would be false positives. FUNDING: Public Health England.

Accuracy of UK Rapid Test Consortium (UK-RTC) "AbC-19 Rapid Test" for detection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in key workers: test accuracy study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the AbC-19 Rapid Test lateral flow immunoassay for the detection of previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. DESIGN: Test accuracy study. SETTING: Laboratory based evaluation. PARTICIPANTS: 2847 key workers (healthcare staff, fire and rescue officers, and police officers) in England in June 2020 (268 with a previous polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive result (median 63 days previously), 2579 with unknown previous infection status); and 1995 pre-pandemic blood donors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: AbC-19 sensitivity and specificity, estimated using known negative (pre-pandemic) and known positive (PCR confirmed) samples as reference standards and secondly using the Roche Elecsys anti-nucleoprotein assay, a highly sensitive laboratory immunoassay, as a reference standard in samples from key workers. RESULTS: Test result bands were often weak, with positive/negative discordance by three trained laboratory staff for 3.9% of devices. Using consensus readings, for known positive and negative samples sensitivity was 92.5% (95% confidence interval 88.8% to 95.1%) and specificity was 97.9% (97.2% to 98.4%). Using an immunoassay reference standard, sensitivity was 94.2% (90.7% to 96.5%) among PCR confirmed cases but 84.7% (80.6% to 88.1%) among other people with antibodies. This is consistent with AbC-19 being more sensitive when antibody concentrations are higher, as people with PCR confirmation tended to have more severe disease whereas only 62% (218/354) of seropositive participants had had symptoms. If 1 million key workers were tested with AbC-19 and 10% had actually been previously infected, 84 700 true positive and 18 900 false positive results would be projected. The probability that a positive result was correct would be 81.7% (76.8% to 85.8%). CONCLUSIONS: AbC-19 sensitivity was lower among unselected populations than among PCR confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2, highlighting the scope for overestimation of assay performance in studies involving only PCR confirmed cases, owing to "spectrum bias." Assuming that 10% of the tested population have had SARS-CoV-2 infection, around one in five key workers testing positive with AbC-19 would be false positives. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 56609224.

Orthognathic treatment: see how they feel?

As clinicians we are becoming increasingly careful in our pre-treatment screening processes and in acknowledging the importance of psychological assessment of potential orthognathic patients. However, this does not necessarily guarantee post-treatment satisfaction, even if the clinician thinks the clinical outcome is good. This paper provides the clinician with a schematic framework of those factors which may affect post-treatment outcomes.

A qualitative study of orthognathic patients' perceptions of referral to a mental health professional: part 1--questionnaire development.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to develop a measure to assess orthognathic patients' perceptions of referral to a mental health professional. DESIGN: Prospective qualitative study. SETTING: UCLH Foundation Trust. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study was divided into two parts. The first phase involved developing a patient-centred questionnaire by carrying out semi-structured interviews with 10 orthognathic patients and 10 clinicians involved in orthognathic treatment provision. The transcripts from these interviews were then analysed using the N6 software package for qualitative research and thematic content analysis was carried out. As key themes and theories of patients' perceptions of referral to a mental health professional began to emerge from the data, this directed the source of further interviews, allowing exploration and validation of all theories. When new themes ceased to arise, it was assumed that data saturation was reached, and no further interviews were undertaken. A questionnaire was then developed using the key themes from the interviews and this was piloted. RESULTS: Analysis of the interviews revealed that patient views could be divided into two main themes: service provision and perceptions of mental health professionals. These themes were incorporated into a questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: A new measure of patients' perceptions of referral to a mental health professional is presented.

A qualitative study of orthognathic patients' perceptions of referral to a mental health professional: Part 2--a questionnaire study.

OBJECTIVES: There is evidence to suggest that clinicians are reluctant to refer orthognathic patients for psychological evaluation due to fear of the patient reacting badly to the suggestion. The aim of this study was to assess orthognathic patients' perceptions of referral to a psychiatrist/psychologist using a previously developed patient-centred questionnaire. METHODS: The study was divided into two parts. Stage 1 (presented previously) involved developing the questionnaire using qualitative methodology and stage 2 involved distribution of the questionnaire to 63 orthognathic patients. This paper describes the findings of stage 2. SETTING: UCLH Foundation Trust. RESULTS: The majority of patients viewed referral to a psychiatrist/psychologist positively (95.2%), the main benefits being having someone neutral to talk to who could explain and prepare them for treatment. Patients said they would prefer the referral to be made by the clinician they are most familiar with and to see the psychiatrist/psychologist on a one-to-one basis (79.4%) in an environment they are familiar with. The main perceived drawback of seeing a psychiatrist was the inconvenience of an additional visit. CONCLUSIONS: Fear of the patient reacting badly to being referred to a mental health professional appears to be unfounded in this study of patients from a large teaching hospital and should not prevent clinicians referring patients whom they think would benefit from this.

Primary hyperparathyroidism presenting as acute psychosis secondary to hypercalcaemia requiring curative parathyroidectomy.

Primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) can cause hypercalcaemia secondary to a pathologically high secretion of parathyroid hormone. Rarely this can first manifest as acute psychosis. It is imperative to exclude organic causes of psychosis before labelling the psychosis as primarily psychological. If hypercalcaemia is revealed, investigation is required to elucidate the underlying cause whilst instigating treatment to lower serum calcium levels. If PHPT is the underlying pathology, subsequent treatment involves surgical exploration and resection of the parathyroid adenoma or hyperplasia.

Motivation for orthognathic treatment and anticipated satisfaction levels-a two-centre cross-national audit.

PURPOSE: This audit investigated factors which motivate patients to seek orthognathic treatment, assessed how confident patients were that they would be satisfied with the outcome of treatment, and explored possible influencing factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to pre-surgical patients at two centres (United Kingdom and Switzerland); questions asked what patients wished to gain from orthognathic treatment and how confident they were that they would be satisfied with treatment outcome. Gender, age and location were recorded as demographic variables, and type of malocclusion was also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 202 questionnaires were returned (UK, n = 149; Switzerland, n = 53). Reported motivating factors focused on improvements in aesthetics (specified and unspecified) (UK vs. Switzerland: 91.3% vs. 83.0%), function (72.5% vs. 66.0%), psychosocial health (51.7% vs. 20.8%), speech (4.0% vs. 7.5%), alleviation of pain (5.4% vs. 17%) and normalization of breathing (1.3% vs. 7.5%). No significant relationships were observed relative to patient age, gender or malocclusion. The anticipated satisfaction levels were generally high (86.5% vs. 89.9%). CONCLUSION: Although the distribution of motivational factors varied between the two sites, it did not affect the anticipated satisfaction level. Patients were generally confident that they would be satisfied with their treatment outcome and that their reasons for seeking treatment would be addressed.