Ear and hearing health in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people aged 15 years and older: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: Review empirical research investigating the prevalence, experiences and management of hearing loss and ear disease in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. DESIGN: Scoping review. STUDY SAMPLES: Searches of four electronic databases, Advanced Google, and key webpages identified 16,373 studies - 21 met inclusion criteria: original research relating to hearing/ear health and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. RESULTS: Fourteen studies measured prevalence of hearing loss or middle-ear dysfunction, with a rate of hearing loss at an estimated 50% (reports ranging from 8% to 100%). Five studies reported views, attitudes, and experiences of hearing loss, with results showing hearing loss negatively impacted individual experiences in health and justice systems, and health professionals had limited understanding of the socioeconomic risk factors of middle ear disease. No articles directly reported on hearing loss management. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of research into the hearing health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, despite its critical importance in addressing health and social inequities. Given the widely varying and imprecise estimated rates of hearing loss detected, urgent action is needed to obtain accurate prevalence estimates and, in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, identify the best methods of screening and managing hearing loss.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander oral health and its impact among adults: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Robust oral health epidemiological information for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults is scant. Set within a large urban population, this study describes self-reported oral health behaviours, status and impact assessed through computerized health checks (HC), stratified by age groups and sex, and identifies associations with dental appearance satisfaction. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults (aged ≥20 years) attending the Southern Queensland Centre of Excellence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015 who had HC and provided research consent. RESULTS: There were 945 patients, 466 (49.3%) female, with an average age of 41.3 years (range, 20-82). Overall, 97.3% owned a toothbrush and 56.2% brushed two or more times/day. Despite self-reporting a significant oral health burden, only 28.8% visited a dentist within 12 months, mostly due to problems (84.3%). Surprisingly, only 28.4% reported dental appearance dissatisfaction, likely a result of community normalization whereby people are resigned to poor oral health. CONCLUSIONS: Under-utilization of dental services remains problematic for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. To close the oral heath gap, culturally appropriate, acceptable and safe integrated primary health systems, with co-located dental services, demand consideration.

Delayed antibiotics for respiratory infections.

BACKGROUND: Modest benefits of antibiotics for acute upper respiratory tract infections have to be weighed against common adverse reactions, cost and antibacterial resistance. There has been interest in ways to reduce antibiotic prescribing. One strategy is to provide the prescription, but advise delay of more than 48 hours before use, in the hope symptoms resolve first. Advocates suggest this will preserve patient satisfaction. This review asks what effect delayed antibiotics have on clinical outcomes of respiratory infections, antibiotic use and patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prescribing strategy of delayed antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections compared to immediate or no antibiotics for clinical outcomes, antibiotic use and patient satisfaction. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1966 to January Week 2, 2007), EMBASE (1990 to Week 2, 2007) and Current Contents - ISI Web of Knowledge (1998 to January 2007). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients of all ages defined as having an acute respiratory infection were included in which delayed antibiotics were compared to antibiotics used immediately or no antibiotics. Outcomes measured included clinical outcomes, antibiotic use and patient satisfaction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were collected and analysed by three review authors. MAIN RESULTS: Nine trials were eligible on the basis of design and relevant outcomes. For most clinical outcomes there was no difference between delayed, immediate and no antibiotics. Antibiotics prescribed immediately were more effective than delayed for fever, pain and malaise in some studies of patients with acute otitis media and sore throat but for other studies there was no difference. There was no difference for the common cold and bronchitis. Delaying antibiotic prescriptions reduced antibiotic use, and in three studies, reduced patient satisfaction compared to immediate antibiotics. In the other two studies comparing delayed and immediate antibiotics measuring satisfaction, there was no difference. Two studies also included a 'no antibiotics' arm for bronchitis and sore throat: there was no difference in symptom resolution nor patient satisfaction from antibiotic delay. In one study, but not the other, antibiotic use was significantly decreased with no, rather than delayed, antibiotics. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For most clinical outcomes there is no difference between the strategies. Immediate antibiotics was the strategy most likely to provide the best clinical outcomes in patients with sore throat and otitis media. Delaying or avoiding antibiotics, rather than providing them immediately, reduces antibiotic use for acute respiratory infections. Delay also reduced patient satisfaction in three trials, compared to immediate antibiotics with no difference in two other trials. Delaying antibiotics seems to have little advantage over avoiding them altogether where it is safe to do so.

Antibiotics for bronchiolitis in children.

BACKGROUND: Bronchiolitis is a serious, potentially life-threatening respiratory illness commonly affecting young babies. It is most often caused by Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV). The diagnosis is usually made on clinical grounds (especially tachypnoea and wheezing in a child less than two years of age). Antibiotics are not recommended for bronchiolitis unless there is concern about complications such as secondary bacterial pneumonia. Despite this, they are used at rates of 34 to 99% in uncomplicated cases. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of antibiotics for bronchiolitis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) which includes the Acute Respiratory Infection Groups' specialised register, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1966 to August Week 2, 2006); EMBASE (1990 to March 2006); and Current Contents (2001 to September 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies: single or double blind randomised controlled trials comparing antibiotics to placebo in the treatment of bronchiolitis. TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: children under the age of two years diagnosed with bronchiolitis using clinical criteria (including respiratory distress preceded by coryzal symptoms with or without fever). Types of interventions: oral, intravenous, intramuscular or inhaled antibiotics versus placebo. Types of outcome measures: primary clinical outcomes: time for the resolution of symptoms/signs (pulmonary markers: respiratory distress; wheeze; crepitations; oxygen saturation; and fever). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: hospital admissions; time to discharge from hospital; re-admissions; complications/adverse events developed; and radiological findings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All data were analysed using Review Manager software, version 4.2.7. MAIN RESULTS: One study met our inclusion criteria. It randomised children presenting clinically with bronchiolitis to either ampicillin or placebo. The main outcome measure was duration of illness and death. There was no significant difference between the two groups for length of illness and there were no deaths in either group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found no evidence to support the use of antibiotics for bronchiolitis. This results needs to be treated with caution given only one RCT justified inclusion. It is unlikely that simple RCTs of antibiotics against placebo for bronchiolitis will be undertaken in future. Research to identify a possible small subgroup of patients presenting with bronchiolitis-like symptoms who may benefit from antibiotics may be justified. Otherwise, research may be better focussed on determining the reasons for clinicians to use antibiotics so readily for bronchiolitis, and ways of reducing their anxiety, and therefore their use of antibiotics for bronchiolitis.

Delayed antibiotics for symptoms and complications of respiratory infections.

BACKGROUND: The use of antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections is controversial. Any benefits have to be weighed against common adverse reactions (including rash, abdominal pain, diarrhoea and vomiting), cost and antibacterial resistance. There has been interest in ways to reduce antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections. One is delaying the use of prescribed antibiotics by more than 48 hours for acute upper respiratory tract infections. Such methods have been shown to reduce prescribing. This review asks what effect this practice has on the clinical course of the illness. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effect of delayed antibiotic use in acute upper respiratory tract infections compared to immediate use of antibiotics SEARCH STRATEGY: The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2004) which includes the Acute Respiratory Infection Groups' specialised register; MEDLINE (January 1966 to January Week 1 2004), EMBASE (1990 to September 2003) and Current Contents (1998 to 2003). The search was carried out by an expert librarian. Abstracts of identified articles were used to determine which studies were trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials involving patients of all ages defined as having acute otitis media, acute pharyngitis, sore throat, common cold, a viral upper respiratory tract infection, acute sinusitis, and acute bronchitis were included in which delayed antibiotics are compared to antibiotics used immediately. Delayed antibiotic use was defined as the use of or advice to use antibiotics more than 48 hours after the initial consultation. 'Immediate antibiotic use' was defined as the immediate use of oral antibiotics given at the initial consultation. Clinical outcomes measured included: the presence or absence of fever, cough, pain, duration and severity of illness, complications of the disease, adverse effects from the antibiotics. Trial quality was assessed independently by two reviewers who were blinded to the author, journal and results of each study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data was collected by two reviewers who were blinded to the author and journal. Data were analysed and reported using RevMan. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials were eligible on the basis of design and all reported patient-centred outcomes. Methodological quality of included trials was generally high. There was no difference between immediate and delayed antibiotic groups for symptoms on day one and day seven. For most symptom measures there was no significant difference between the immediate and delayed antibiotic groups. Missing data and marked heterogeneity between study outcomes prevented pooling of results as a meta-analysis. Three studies out of six reporting fever, all involving patients with sore throat, indicated that there was more fever in the delayed antibiotic group. The remaining three studies showed no difference. There was no significant symptom difference for patients with cough or the common cold between the two intervention groups. Pain and malaise severity scores at day three significantly favoured the immediate antibiotic group in children with acute otitis media (Little 2001). In this study by Little 2001 of children with otitis media proxies for other malaise related outcomes were reported, including 'last day of crying' which favoured the immediate antibiotic group by approximately 16 hours (0.69 days; 95% CI 0.31 to 1.07). In the same study, just over half a spoon of paracetamol a day less was used in the immediate antibiotic group (0.59; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.93). There was no significant difference between the intervention groups for the adverse outcome of rash. Two studies reported the outcome of vomiting which was reduced in the immediate antibiotic group in children with suspected streptococcal pharyngitis in El-Daher 1991 but there was no difference in children with sore throat in Little 1997. Diarrhoea was reported by three studies of which two showed no difference Little 1997; Arroll 2002a while Little 2001 reported less diarrhoea in the delayed antibiotic group in children with otitis media. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: When considering treatment options for upper respiratory tract infections, the option of delayed antibiotics has been used in an attempt to reduce the use of antibiotic prescriptions. This review shows that for all symptom scores the evidence varies between trials. Most symptom outcomes show no difference between immediate and delayed antibiotic groups. Three of the six studies, all involving patients with sore throat, indicated that patients in the delayed antibiotic group had significantly more fever that their counterparts in the immediate antibiotic group. The other three showed no difference for the outcome of fever. There is evidence indicating that for children with otitis media, pain and malaise scores are worse in the delayed antibiotic group compared to the immediate antibiotic group. This price must be weighed up against the benefits of reduced antibiotic prescribing. Future randomised controlled trials of delaying antibiotics as an intervention should fully report symptoms as well as changes of prescription rates.