ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the changes in surface morphology of two different types of mini-implants after clinical en masse retraction using scanning electron microscopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty mini-implants of Dentos (Korea, Absoanchor, BH-1817-08) and Orlus (Korea, Yesanchor, C-1817) were inserted in patients in a split-mouth design who required en masse anterior retraction and absolute anchorage. Surface characteristics of mini-implants such as pitch (distance between consecutive threads), flank width (distance between root and crest), and taper were studied using scanning electron microscope (FEI nanosem450) before and after clinical use. RESULTS: Statistically significant difference (p value = 0.003) was found in a mean reduction of pitch dimension among the two groups with a mean difference of 25.000 µm. Also, a statistically significant difference was noted (p value = 0.001) in a mean reduction of flank width among Dentos implants as compared to Orlus implants. A statistically significant difference (p = 0.001) was seen in the mean reduction of taper dimension among Dentos group (0.0140 ± 0.02271) as compared to the Orlus group (0.0810 ± 0.05152). CONCLUSION: A marked reduction in surface morphology such as the pitch, flank width, and taper of both mini-implants after retrieval was observed. Dentos group of mini-implants displayed better dimensional stability post-retrieval as compared to the Orlus group of mini-implants. All the mini-screws showed milling defects in form of scratches on observation under scanning electron microscopy despite a smooth appearance to the naked eye.
ABSTRACT
Objectives To explore general practitioners' perspectives on the discharge summaries they receive about their patients who have been discharged from hospital. Methods A survey of general practitioners in the catchment of a major metropolitan South Australian health service consisting of three teaching hospitals was undertaken. Surveys were disseminated electronically and via hardcopy mailout to general practitioners. The 36-question survey focused on five constructs of discharge summaries: accessibility, length and clarity, format, transparency, and medicines content. Results A total of 150 general practitioners responded (response rate, 27.6%). Respondents were vocationally registered (96%), predominately from metropolitan practices (90.2%), and 65.8% were female. Overwhelmingly, 86.7% of general practitioners stated that the optimal time for receipt of discharge summaries was <48 h post-discharge, and 96.6% considered that late arrival of discharge summaries adversely impacts patient care. The ideal length of discharge summaries was reported as <4 pages by 64% of respondents. A large proportion of respondents (84.6%) would like to be notified when their patients are admitted and discharged from hospital, and 82.7% were supportive of patients receiving their own copy of the discharge summary. A total of 76.7% general practitioners reported that they had detected omissions or discrepancies in the discharge summaries. Provision of rationale for medication changes was viewed as important by 86.7%, however, only 29.3% reported that it is always or often communicated. Conclusions General practitioners supported timely receipt, concise length of discharge summary and format refinement to improve the utility and communication of this important clinical handover from hospital to community care.
