Factors associated with the steep increase in late-midlife stroke occurrence among US men.

BACKGROUND: Data on recent stroke prevalence rates among middle-aged men in the United States indicate that men aged 55 to 64 years are 3 times more likely than men aged 45 to 54 years to have experienced a stroke. We aimed to determine potential risk factors that may contribute to this steep increase in late midlife stroke occurrence. METHODS: We analyzed the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999 to 2004 data sets, assessing stroke prevalence, predictors of stroke occurrence, and vascular risk factors in men across their midlife years. RESULTS: Crudely, higher glycohemoglobin, history of hypertension, history of diabetes, and history of coronary artery disease significantly predicted stroke in 45- to 54- and 54-to 64-year-old men. Significant stroke risk factors unique to each age group were non-white race, lower ankle-brachial pulsatility index, and occurrence of recent severe headache in the 45- to 54-year age group, whereas elevated serum homocysteine (HCY) level predicted stroke in those aged 55 to 64 years. In multivariable regression analysis, lower ankle-brachial pulsatility index (odds ratio [OR] 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.47-1.83, P < .001) and recent severe headache (OR 5.12, 95% CI 1.3-20.1, P = .019) were the only independent predictors of stroke in the 45- to 54-year age group, whereas only elevated HCY predicted stroke in the 55- to 64-year age group (OR 1.708, 95% CI -1.103-2.643, P = .0163). CONCLUSION: Elevated serum HCY level is the sole independent predictor of stroke among men aged 55 to 64 years in the United States. Further study to assess the efficacy of HCY-lowering treatment in mitigating a steep increase in late midlife stroke occurrence among men may be warranted.

Patterns of complementary and alternative medicine use among United States stroke survivors.

BACKGROUND: Americans are increasingly searching for complementary and alternative remedies. Some data suggest that persons who use Complementary and Alternative medicine (CAM) are at a higher risk for interactions with prescription medications. We assessed CAM use among American stroke survivors as little is known about CAM in this population. METHODS: We compared CAM use in adults with and without stroke who participated in the most comprehensive national survey on CAM use to date, the 2002 National Health Interview Survey. Independent predictors of CAM use among stroke survivors were assessed with logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 30,992 adults, 2.6% indicated a history of stroke, with 46% of these stroke survivors reporting CAM use. Acupuncture was the only CAM therapy used more frequently in stroke survivors (OR 1.53, 95% CI=1.07-2.19, p=0.02). In multivariable analyses among stroke survivors, CAM use was more frequent among those who reported delays in seeking medical care due to cost (OR 2.28, 95% CI=1.28-4.07, p=0.005) or those with recent neck pain, (OR 2.28, 95% CI=1.48-3.52, p=0.002) and less frequent among those >65 years (OR 0.54, 95% CI=0.31-0.96, p=0.035), non-Hispanic Blacks (OR 0.57, 95%CI=0.33-1.0, p=0.049), and those with less than high school education (OR 0.33, 95% CI=0.22-0.51, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half the stroke survivors in the United States engage in some form of CAM therapy, with those reporting delays in seeking medical care due to cost, or recent neck pain being more likely to pursue CAM treatment.

A midlife stroke surge among women in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We assessed sex differences in stroke prevalence among individuals of midlife age (35 to 64 years) in the United States and determined factors predicting stroke. METHODS: Data from 1999 to 2004 (n = 17,061) from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a nationally representative sample of US adults, were used to assess sex differences in stroke prevalence and to identify independent predictors of stroke occurrence among middle-aged individuals. RESULTS: Women aged 45 to 54 years had significantly higher odds of having experienced a stroke vs men of the same age (odds ratio [OR] 2.39, 95% CI 1.32 to 4.32). No other significant midlife stroke differences between sexes were noted. A higher stroke trend was seen in 45- to 54-year-old women vs 35- to 44-year-old women (OR 2.13, 95% CI 0.95 to 4.80, p = 0.067), but no difference was seen in stroke rates in 55- to 64-year-old women vs 45- to 54-year-old women (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.6912 to 2.8229, p = 0.352). Independent predictors of stroke in women aged 45 to 54 years were coronary artery disease (OR 12.790, 95% CI 1.901 to 86.063, p = 0.009) and waist circumference (OR 1.543, 95% CI 1.002 to 2.376, p = 0.049). Several vascular risk factors including systolic blood pressure and total cholesterol levels increased at higher rates among women compared with men in each successively older cohort from 35 to 64 years. CONCLUSIONS: A higher prevalence of stroke may exist among women aged 45 to 54 years compared with similarly aged men. This potential disparity could be due in part to inadequate stroke risk factor modification in women and is deserving of further study.

Predictors of clinical outcome in children undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation for acute and chronic liver disease.

The current United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) policy is to allocate liver grafts to pediatric patients with chronic liver disease based on the pediatric end-stage liver disease (PELD) scoring system, while children with fulminant hepatic failure may be urgently listed as Status 1a. The objective of this study was to identify pre-transplant variables that influence patient and graft survival in those children undergoing LTx (liver transplantion) for FHF (fulminant hepatic failure) compared to those patients transplanted for extrahepatic biliary atresia (EHBA), a chronic form of liver disease. The UNOS Liver Transplant Registry was examined for pediatric liver transplants performed for FHF and EHBA from 1987 to 2002. Variables that influenced patient and graft survival were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis. Kaplan-Meier analysis of FHF and EHBA groups revealed that 5 year patient and graft survival were both significantly worse (P < 0.0001) in those patients who underwent transplantation for FHF. Multivariate analysis of 29 variables subsequently revealed distinct sets of factors that influenced patient and graft survival for both FHF and EHBA. These results confirm that separate prioritizing systems for LTx are needed for children with chronic liver disease and FHF; additionally, our findings illustrate that there are unique sets of variables which predict survival following LTx for these two groups.

Views of practicing dentists regarding a mandatory fifth year of training.

As part of a U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration-funded evaluation of the impact of federal funding on postgraduate general dentistry programs, a random sample of 6,725 dentists graduating in 1989, 1993, and 1997 were surveyed regarding practice patterns, advanced training, populations served, services provided, and their position on a mandatory fifth year of training. Responses (1,965) showed 48 percent supporting a mandatory year and 52 percent not supportive. Open-ended comments were provided by 1,626 respondents. The main reasons for supporting a mandatory fifth year were the need for more instructional time and need for a transition year. Individual choice, no value in a fifth year of dental school, mentoring available elsewhere, and cost were cited in opposition. The following respondents were significantly more likely than other respondents to support a mandatory fifth year: individuals who had completed an AEGD, GPR, or specialty program; were Asian; held salaried positions in a community clinic, nursing home, or hospital; or described themselves as a consultant. Graduates in 1993 and 1997 were less supportive of a mandatory fifth year than were 1989 graduates. Significant differences in the reasons offered in support of respondents' positions on the issue were observed among AEGD, GPR, specialists, and nonspecialists and the three cohort years.

Analysis of federal support for postgraduate general dentistry.

We compared the funding granted by the federal government between 1985 and 1997 to stimulate the growth of AEGD and GPR programs across HRSA regions, states, and populations. Information regarding the number, size, and location of programs available during the time period of 1985 to 1997 was collected. During this period, although the number of programs remained constant, the composition of the programs changed, with AEGD programs increasing by 113 percent and GPR programs decreasing by 13 percent. HRSA Regions 2, 3, and 5 combined offered over 50 percent of all programs. The number of residency positions rose by 28 percent in civilian programs and dropped by 11 percent in Veterans and Military (VA/M) positions. Overall growth in AEGD positions increased 208 percent, while the civilian GPR positions remained constant and the number of VA/M GPR positions dropped by 30 percent. A higher percentage increase in programs occurred in cities of greater than 500,000 population than in less densely populated areas. HRSA spent dollar 41,254,501 in the thirteen-year time frame, and funding by region varied by over a hundredfold. Programs in the least dense population groups were often the least funded. There was great variability in the amount of HRSA money received by state, with fifteen states receiving no funding during the thirteen years. Without HRSA dollars, it is apparent that the postgraduate general dental training program would not have gained the vitality it currently offers. However, attention must be paid to developing programs among states with a lack of infrastructure in dental education and training.

Military and VA general dentistry training: a national resource.

In 1999, HRSA contracted with the UCLA School of Dentistry to evaluate the postgraduate general dentistry (PDG) training programs. The purpose of this article is to compare the program characteristics of the PGD training programs sponsored by the Armed Services (military) and VA. Surveys mailed to sixty-six VA and forty-two military program directors in fall 2000 sought information regarding the infrastructure of the program, the program emphasis, resident preparation prior to entering the program, and a description of patients served and types of services provided. Of the eighty-one returned surveys (75 percent response rate), thirty were received from military program directors and fifty-one were received from VA program directors. AEGDs reported treating a higher proportion of children patients and GPRs more medically intensive, disadvantaged and HIV/AIDS patients. Over half of the directors reported increases in curriculum emphasis in implantology. The program directors reported a high level of inadequate preparation among incoming dental residents. Having a higher ratio of residents to total number of faculty predicted inadequate preparation (p=.022) although the model was weak. Although HRSA doesn't financially support federally sponsored programs, their goal of improved dental training to care for medically compromised individuals is facilitated through these programs, thus making military and VA general dentistry programs a national resource.

Characteristics of civilian postdoctoral general dentistry programs.

U.S. civilian (non-VA/non-military) Advanced Education in General Dentistry (AEGD) and General Practice Residency (GPR) programs were identified (n=208) and surveyed. The assessment evaluated infrastructure support, populations served, services provided, and trainee stipends. One hundred thirty-one programs responded (thirty-two AEGD, 64 percent/ninety-nine GPR, 63 percent). Sixty-nine programs were HRSA-funded (53 percent), and sixty-three (47 percent) were nonfunded. One hundred and five responses identified hospital/medical center resources; fifty-six indicated dental school support. Mean faculty support was similar regardless of program type or HRSA funding. Mean first-year positions in AEGDs were greater than GPRs. Mean first-year GPR positions were greater in funded than in nonfunded programs. A comparison of AEGD and GPR programs showed that residents in GPRs treated more children, medically intensive, economically/socially disadvantaged, and in-patient/same-day surgery patients (p<0.05). Residents in AEGDs treated more healthy adults (p<0.05). GPRs treated more lower fee (no pay, Medicaid, welfare/general relief, Medicare, and capitation/HMO) patients. AEGDs treated more insurance/private pay patients (p=.0001). No differences existed in comprehensive care and emergency visits between AEGDs and GPRs. GPRs treated more hospital-based patients. The mean stipends for GPRs ($32,055) and AEGDs ($22,403) were different.

PGD training and its impact on general dentist practice patterns.

This study compares the practice patterns of general dentists with and without formal advanced training in AGED or GPR programs. The UCLA School of Dentistry surveyed a random selection of dentists from graduating years 1989, 1993, and 1997 as part of a Health Resources Services Administration (HRSA)-supported evaluation of the impact of federal funding on postgraduate general dentistry (PGD) programs. Using a sample drawn by the American Dental Association (ADA), 6,725 dentists were surveyed about their practice, advanced training, patients served, and services provided. Of the 2,029 dentists (30 percent) who responded, 49 percent were practicing dentists with no formal advanced training in general dentistry or one of the eight ADA specialties; 7 percent had Advanced Education in General Dentistry (AEGD) experience; 20 percent trained in a General Practice Residency (GPR); and 24 percent were specialists. Additionally, 7 percent of respondents had PGD training and a clinical specialty. GPR-trained dentists were significantly more likely to be on a hospital staff and to treat medically compromised patients even after ten years of practice. PGD dentists were less likely to seek specialty training. Major reasons for seeking PGD training were increasing treatment speed, learning to treat medically compromised patients, and wanting hospital experience. Primary reasons for not selecting training were starting a practice and having a great practice opportunity. Our conclusion is that PGD training has an enduring impact on practice patterns and improves access to dental care for underserved populations.

Gender differences in career and practice patterns of PGD-trained dentists.

This study compares differences by gender in the practice patterns and professional activities of general dentists, specialists, and dentists with Advanced Education in General Dentistry (AEGD) or General Practice Residency (GPR) training. The UCLA School of Dentistry surveyed a random sample of 6,725 dentists graduating from dental school in 1989, 1993, and 1997 as part of an evaluation of the impact of federal funding on postgraduate general dentist (PGD) programs. The survey asked about current practice, services referred and provided, and professional activities. Of the 2,029 dentists (30 percent) who responded, 49 percent were general dentists with no specialty training; 7 percent had AEGD training; 20 percent had GPR training; and 24 percent had specialty training. General dentists were more likely to be in private practice (p < 0.05). AEGDs, specialists, and females were more likely to report faculty positions as a secondary occupation. General dentists were more likely to be practice owners than AEGD- or GPR-trained dentists. The mean number of patients seen was highest for specialists. Females reported fewer patients than males, and this difference was significant for GPR-trained dentists. With respect to services, GPR-trained dentists reported significantly more biopsy procedures, conscious sedation, periodontal surgery, and implants than general dentists. AEGD-trained dentists reported more conscious sedation than general dentists. GPR dentists were more likely to volunteer time than general dentists without specialty training. PGD training appears to result in different types of employment and specific practice patterns that strengthen primary care dentistry. We further conclude that there are gender differences in the types of practice, patients seen, and services provided. These findings occur in addition to training differences.