A five-step risk management process for geriatric dental practice during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an RNA virus that causes coronavirus infection (COVID-19). COVID-19 is a highly contagious disease transmitted through respiratory droplets, saliva and other contact routes. Within 10 months of its outbreak, SARS-CoV-2 has infected more than 23 million people around the world. Evidence suggests that older adults are the most vulnerable to infection and have an increased risk of mortality. Reduced immunity and underlying medical conditions make them risk-prone and vulnerable to critical care. Older adults affected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus present with distinct clinical manifestations necessitating specific treatment needs and management protocols. While it is crucial to prevent the spread of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), the role of oral healthcare workers in addressing the specific needs of ageing adult patients by adopting specific guidelines and appropriate infection control protocols is timely. This paper aims to develop specific guidelines and protocols for the dental management of geriatric patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Influence of Socio-Economic and Cultural Factors on Type 1 Diabetes Management: Report from a Tertiary Care Multidisciplinary Diabetes Management Center in India.

OBJECTIVE: To study the association of socio-economic (SE) and cultural factors with HbA1c and diabetes knowledge of children, adolescents and young adults with T1DM managed in the authors' centre, as these may be unique to a country or a region. METHODS: Demographic details, SE scoring, body mass index and mean of the last two HbA1c values were recorded, in 173 eligible patients. A diabetes knowledge test (DKT) was administered. RESULTS: Median (range) age was 14.0 (3.25-25.5) y and HbA1c 8.2 ± 1.3%. The patients travelled a median of 124 (range 0.5-850) km and 2.3 (range 0.1-18.3) h each way, to reach the clinic. Only 2 children took insulin at school / college. Insulin adjustment for pre-meal blood glucose was practiced by 88%, but adjustment for meal intake by only 17% patients. Median HbA1c was lower in the participants with age > 18 y [7.7 (5.6-11.0) %] vs. < 10 y [8.3 (6.3-10.6) %, p < 0.02] or 10-18 y [(8.3 (5.9-12.6) %, p < 0.02)]. Overweight /obesity were seen in 35%. On multivariate regression, HbA1c was associated negatively with DKT score (DKTS) and age group, and DKTS was associated positively with urban residence and maternal education > class 12th. HbA1c and DKTS were not associated with income. CONCLUSIONS: Low income may be successfully compensated by other factors to obtain good glycemic control. HbA1c did not deteriorate in adolescence in contrast to world experience. Overweight is a worrisome problem. Improved societal awareness about childhood diabetes is crucial.

The impact of free medical supplies and regular telephonic contact on glycemic control in Indian children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The effect of economic assistance to underprivileged families with type 1 diabetes has never been described. Such a study is relevant as logistic and cultural factors may preclude an anticipated good outcome. The objective of the study is to determine the impact of economic and educational intervention on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and diabetes knowledge. METHODS: Eighty-five consecutive participants were prospectively provided insulin and glucose strips for 1 year. From the 6th to 12th month, patients were randomized such that half of them (telephone group) received proactive telephonic advice by a diabetes educator, while the non-telephone group received usual care. HbA1c and diabetes knowledge were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Significant improvement was seen in HbA1c with provision of free diabetes supplies, when patients were compared with their own HbA1c values during the prior 36 months (baseline [8.38 ± 2.0%], at 3 months [8.0 ± 1.6%] and at 6 months [8.1 ± 1.5%, P = 0.0106]). Knowledge score increased from baseline (48 ± 15) to 6 months (58 ± 13, P < 0.001). No difference was seen between the telephone and non-telephone groups in HbA1c from the 6th to 9th and 12th month. The knowledge score showed significant improvement in the telephone group during the proactive telephonic advice study compared with the non-telephone group (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The provision of free medical supplies improved HbA1c and diabetes knowledge. Intensive telephone contact improved knowledge, not HbA1c. These results provide important background for policy makers and diabetes management teams.