Student Perceptions of Substance Use Disorder Stigma as a Factor for Health Disparities: A Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of substance use disorders (SUDs) is an alarming problem in the United States; however, only a fraction of patients receive treatment. Stigma from both healthcare professionals and society at large negatively impacts SUD treatment. There are limited data regarding the perceptions of healthcare students on SUD stigma as a health disparity. METHODS: We conducted a concurrent mixed-methods study among students enrolled in six health-related colleges at one mid-south health science center in the US over 3 months. Both an electronic survey consisting of 17 close-ended questions and researcher-led focus groups were conducted to understand their perceptions of stigma and SUDs. The research team followed the six steps recommended by Braun and Clarke regarding the data that aimed to capture associations between categories and extract and conceptualize the themes, and thematic analysis was done using Dedoose® (Manhattan Beach, CA, USA) qualitative software, which facilitated all the codes being kept organized and compared the frequency of codes across categories. RESULTS: A total of n = 428 students participated in the survey (response rate = 13%), and n = 31 students took part in five focus groups. Most student respondents, on average, either agreed or strongly agreed that: stigma currently exists in the healthcare field; stigma can lead to patients' not receiving the appropriate care for an SUD; and stigma can lead to lower quality care provided to patients with SUDs. Two themes were identified based on the thematic analysis: (1) additional training is necessary to better equip students for addressing SUDs in practice and (2) suggestions were formed to develop synergy between didactic and clinical rotations to improve SUD training. CONCLUSIONS: It is evident that students perceive the stigma surrounding SUDs as a detriment to patient care. Opportunities may exist in professional training programs to more seamlessly and intentionally weave SUD treatment and management concepts throughout the curriculum, as well as to empower students to operate in the complex regulatory scheme that exists for SUDs in the US.

Fetal Age Assessment From Primary Teeth and Long Bones.

ABSTRACT: This study evaluated traditional and expedited methods for assessing the age of fetal remains. Because of their rare occurrence, the discovery of fresh, decomposing, disfigured, or skeletal fetuses engenders heightened awareness by forensic pathologists primarily tasked with age estimation in relation to viability. With decomposed complete or isolated fetal remains, dentists focus on primary molar mineralization, whereas anthropologists perform long bone measurements along with discernment of other indicators of skeletal maturity to obtain an age estimation.The results of this study are 4-fold: (1) The "best" technique for harvesting fetal tooth buds and long bones is the dissection of the developing tooth buds with maceration for the long bones. (2) Metric analysis was applied to the tooth buds and long bones for age estimation, and the findings were correlated. (3) There is a statistically significant difference between known age and dental age and between dental age and long bone age. The difference between known age and long bone age is not statistically significant, but a type II error exists because of the small sample size. (4) A central incisor staging technique for fetuses younger than 26 weeks was developed as a supplement to the molar staging system of Kraus and Jordan (1965).

Dental Age Assessment of United States Black and White Children: Performance Reliability of Harris and McKee (1990).

ABSTRACT: Medicolegal authorities use forensic dental age assessment of children to establish a biologic profile to assist in human identification, answer questions related to immigration, and answer questions used to substantiate eligibility for social benefits. The goal of this study was to assess the performance reliability of the child dental age assessment data previously published for White and Black children in the United States. A total of 432 dental panoramic radiographs were obtained from 3 geographic locations in the United States: Memphis, Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, and Saint Louis, Missouri. Radiographs were staged, and the estimated age was calculated using the previously published data. Multiple age assessments were conducted to determine the effect of excluding certain teeth on estimated age. The results indicated estimated ages using the previously published reference data set were accurate and concordant with known chronologic age across the ancestral, sex, and geographic categories. The results also indicated that the known chronologic age fell within one standard deviation of the estimated age more than the statistical expectation for most categories. Excluding canines provided the most accurate estimation of known chronologic age.

Difficulty envisioning a positive future: Secondary analyses in patients in intensive care who are communication vulnerable.

The purpose of this study was to report a secondary analysis of data collected through a primary study. The primary study was a, randomized, control trial that used a team-designed (nursing, speech language hearing, engineering, communication sciences, and biostatistics), nurse-led, electronic communication intervention (Speak for Myself Voice) and measured patient outcomes of symptoms of anxiety and depression in five intensive care units at a regional, magnet-status, academic medical center. A secondary analysis of data using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale is reported here. The extant literature supports patient expressions of frustration, anger, anxiety, and depression when unable to communicate. This secondary analysis study report adds information about Hospital Anxiety and Depression subscales in the communication-vulnerable population. Implications include emerging awareness of potential feelings of depression and anxiety in patients who are receiving mechanical ventilation or who are unable to verbally communicate for any reason (e.g. obstruction, trauma, head and neck cancer) in the intensive care unit.

Does Restriction of Public Health Care Dental Benefits Affect the Volume, Severity, or Cost of Dental-Related Hospital Visits?

PURPOSE: On July 1, 2012, the Illinois legislature passed the Save Medicaid Access and Resources Together (SMART) Act, which restricts adult public dental insurance coverage to emergency-only treatment. The purpose of this study was to measure the effect of this restriction on the volume, severity, and treatment costs of odontogenic infections in an urban hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients presenting for odontogenic pain or infection at the University of Illinois Hospital was performed. Data were collected using related International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2013 and divided into 2 cohorts over consecutive 18-month periods. Outcome variables included age, gender, insurance status, oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) consultation, imaging, treatment, treatment location, number of hospital admission days, and inpatient care level. Severity was determined by the presence of OMS consultation, incision and drainage, hospital admission, and cost per encounter. Hospital charges were used to compare the cost of care between cohorts. Between-patients statistics were used to compare risk factors and outcomes between cohorts. RESULTS: Of 5,192 encounters identified, 1,405 met the inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences between cohorts for age (P = .28) or gender (P = .43). After passage of the SMART Act, emergency department visits increased 48%, surgical intervention increased 100%, and hospital admission days increased 128%. Patients were more likely to have an OMS consult (odds ratio [OR] = 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.81), an incision and drainage (OR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.13-1.94), and a longer hospital admission (P = .04). The average cost per encounter increased by 20% and the total cost of care increased by $1.6 million. CONCLUSION: After limitation of dental benefits, there was an increase in the volume and severity of odontogenic infections. In addition, there was an escalated health care cost. The negative public health effects and increased economic impact of eliminating basic dental care show the importance of affordable and accessible preventative oral health care.