Psychosocial changes in patients submitted to orthodontic surgery treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to answer the following question: What is the psychological impact of orthognathic surgery on patients with dentofacial deformities undergoing orthodontic-surgical treatment? MATERIAL AND METHODS: The search was adapted for each of the following databases: American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences (LILACS), Cochrane Library, Embase, Psychinfo, PubMed/Medline, Scopus and Web of Science, and gray literature using Google Scholar, OpenGrey, and ProQuest. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Assessment Checklist. This study performed estimates of interest, random-effects meta-analyses, and calculated heterogeneity using Higgins inconsistency index (I2). RESULTS: A total of 6751 references were found in all searches. After applying the eligibility criteria after full-text reading, 37 studies comprised the final qualitative synthesis. Thirteen studies were included in quantitative synthesis, and it was possible to meta-analyze data from the following questionnaires: GHQ-28, MMPI, RSES, and SCL-90-R. There was an improvement in psychological aspects related to depression, hysteria, self-esteem, anxiety, obsessive-compulsiveness, interpersonal sensitivity, paranoid ideas, and psychoticism (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Correction of dentofacial deformity through orthodontic-surgical treatment is associated with improvements observed in several psychological domains, especially in relation to depressive states. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This result highlights the importance of surgeons and orthodontists in promoting adequate control of patients' expectations and treatment goals taking into account the individual's psychological aspects.

Deglutition assessment instruments used in critical patients submitted to orotracheal extubation: a scoping review

ABSTRACT Purpose: to map, through a literature survey, which instruments are used to assess swallowing in patients after orotracheal extubation. Methods: available evidence was mapped through six electronic databases and gray literature. There were no restrictions regarding gender, ethnicity of the individuals, language of the studies, time of publication, and diagnosis. Results: the most mentioned protocol in the studies was the Dysphagia Risk Evaluation Protocol and the most cited objective assessment exam was the flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing. Conclusion: there is a need for a specific protocol to evaluate this profile of patients, in addition to comparative studies of subjective clinical evaluation and instrumental imaging.