RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine if the elastic chain premaxillary retraction (ECPR) appliance increases inter-medial and inter-lateral canthal dimension in patients with bilateral complete cleft lip and palate (BCLP). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Specialized tertiary care facility. PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: 126 patients with BCLP; 75 had ECPR, 51 had no pre-surgical manipulation. INTERVENTIONS: Three-dimensional facial photographs were obtained prior to insertion of appliance (T0), post-appliance therapy prior to appliance removal/labial repair (T1), and several months after labial repair (T2) for a longitudinal ECPR group, and were obtained after age 4 years (T3) for a non-longitudinal ECPR group and for the non-ECPR group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inter-medial and inter-lateral canthal dimension (en-en, ex-ex) was determined for all groups/time-points. Measurements were compared between groups and to norms. RESULTS: The mean en-en and ex-ex was 32.6 ± 3.2â mm and 84.4 ± 6.3â mm for the ECPR group and 33.5 ± 3.1â mm and 86.7 ± 7.2â mm for the non-ECPR group at T3. Inter-medial and inter-lateral canthal dimensions were significantly greater than normal (P < .05) in both groups; there was no significant difference between groups (P > .05). The mean en-en and ex-ex for the Longitudinal ECPR group was 27.5 ± 2.4â mm and 66.7 ± 3.7â mm at T0, 29.6 ± 2.4â mm and 70.4 ± 2.9â mm at T1, and 29.2 ± 2.3â mm and 72.3 ± 3.8â mm at T2. en-en and ex-ex increased significantly from T0-T1 (P < .05), decreased at T2 (P > .05) and was significantly larger than normal at all time-points (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Inter-medial and inter-lateral canthal dimension increased after ECPR but returned to baseline growth trajectory. These dimensions were above normal at all time-points. There was no difference between those that did and did not have dentofacial orthopedic manipulation.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Medical students report high levels of stress related to their medical training as well as to other personal and financial factors. The aim of this study is to investigate whether there are differences in course-related stressors reported by medical students on undergraduate problem-based learning (PBL) and non-PBL programmes in the UK. METHOD: A cross-sectional study of second-year medical students in two UK medical schools (one PBL and one non-PBL programme) was conducted. A 16-question self-report questionnaire, derived from the Perceived Medical Student Stress Scale and the Higher Education Stress Inventory, was used to measure course-related stressors. Following univariate analysis of each stressor between groups, multivariate logistic regression was used to determine which stressors were the best predictors of each course type, while controlling for socio-demographic differences between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 280 students responded. Compared to the non-PBL students (N = 197), the PBL students (N = 83) were significantly more likely to agree that: they did not know what the faculty expected of them (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.38, p = 0.03); there were too many small group sessions facilitated only by students resulting in an unclear curriculum (OR = 0.04, p < 0.0001); and that there was a lack of opportunity to explore academic subjects of interest (OR = 0.40, p = 0.02). They were significantly more likely to disagree that: there was a lack of encouragement from teachers (OR = 3.11, p = 0.02); and that the medical course fostered a sense of anonymity and feelings of isolation amongst students (OR = 3.42, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in the perceived course-related stressors affecting medical students on PBL and non-PBL programmes. Course designers and student support services should therefore tailor their work to minimise, or help students cope with, the specific stressors on each course type to ensure optimum learning and wellbeing among our future doctors.
