Exploring Associations between Oral Health and Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older People.

BACKGROUND: In frail older people with natural teeth factors like polypharmacy, reduced salivary flow, a decrease of oral self-care, general healthcare issues, and a decrease in dental care utilization contribute to an increased risk for oral complications. On the other hand, oral morbidity may have a negative impact on frailty. OBJECTIVE: This study explored associations between oral health and two frailty measures in community-dwelling older people. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING: The study was carried out in a Primary Healthcare Center (PHC) in The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 5,816 persons registered in the PHC, 1,814 persons were eligible for participation at the start of the study. MEASUREMENTS: Two frailty measures were used: 1. Being at risk for frailty, using Electronical Medical Record (EMR) data, and: 2. Survey-based frailty using 'The Groningen Frailty Indicator' (GFI). For oral health measures, dental-record data (dental care utilization, dental status, and oral health information) and self-reported oral problems were recorded. Univariate regression analyses were applied to determine the association between oral health and frailty, followed by age- and sex-adjusted multivariate logistic regressions. RESULTS: In total 1,202 community-dwelling older people were included in the study, 45% were male and the mean age was 73 years (SD=8). Of all participants, 53% was at risk for frailty (638/1,202), and 19% was frail based on the GFI (222/1,202). A dental emergency visit (Odds Ratio (OR)= 2.0, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)=1.33;3.02 and OR=1.58, 95% CI=1.00;2.49), experiencing oral problems (OR=2.07, 95% CI=1.52;2.81 and OR=2.87, 95% CI= 2.07;3.99), and making dietary adaptations (OR=2.66, 95% CI=1.31;5.41 and OR=5.49, 95% CI= 3.01;10.01) were associated with being at risk for frailty and survey-based frailty respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A dental emergency visit and self-reported oral health problems are associated with frailty irrespective of the approach to its measurement. Healthcare professionals should be aware of the associations of oral health and frailty in daily practice.

Usage and Scientific Properties of the ADVOCATE Oral Health Care Measures.

BACKGROUND: Feedback information about the quality of oral health care is important for reflective learning by oral health care professionals and the wider health system. To this end, a list of 48 topics describing oral health and oral health care was recently agreed as part of the EU H2020 ADVOCATE project. OBJECTIVE: This article reports on the formulation of measures based on the ADVOCATE topics and provides information on usage, reporting, validity, and reliability of the measures. METHODS: The AIRE instrument was used to guide the methodological approach adopted. The appropriateness of the measures was tested among 39 general dental practitioners (GDPs) in Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands. Data were collected from a convenience sample of patients via a questionnaire deployed in an online application in their practice. Feasibility, acceptability, and usefulness of the measures were evaluated through focus group interviews with GDPs. Face validity and test-retest reliability of the measures were assessed. RESULTS: For 46 of the 48 topics, a measure could be defined by constructing a definition and a numerator and denominator. Data collection for all 46 measures was feasible and acceptable for patients using the online questionnaire. The practicalities of using claims data for the purpose of giving feedback to individual and groups of GDPs proved to be challenging in terms of timely access of such data, the granularity of the data, and matching the content of the data with the consented items on quality of oral health care. Face validity was considered appropriate, as the patients found the questionnaire easy to understand. Test-retest reliability was found to be acceptable for 36 of 46 measures. CONCLUSION: The broad range of the ADVOCATE oral health care measures could make a useful contribution to a more transparent, evidence-based, and patient-centered oral health care system. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: This study shows the usage, reliability, and validity of 46 oral health care measures. The measures, which include patient experience and health behaviors, were found to be useful to stimulate discussions about clinical practice. The measures can provide essential information for quality improvement strategies and useful and relevant feedback information for GDPs.

A comparison of international clinical practice guidelines on adult chronic rhinosinusitis shows considerable variability of recommendations for diagnosis and treatment.

OBJECTIVES: To compare international clinical practice guidelines on adult chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). DESIGN: Extensive literature search in Embase, PubMed and the internet (Google, websites of well-known guideline organizations) on November 21st 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Guidelines' quality was measured by the AGREE II instrument. A summary and comparison of recommendations on diagnosis and treatment with harmonized levels of evidence (LoE) and grade of recommendations (GoR) is given. RESULTS: We selected ten guidelines on CRS. Five guidelines were of sufficient to high quality according to AGREE II, the remaining guidelines predominantly did not meet AGREE II criteria. We harmonized all guideline recommendations so we could compare them, although three guidelines did not provide a LoE. Five guidelines provided recommendations on diagnosis, all of them recommended performing nasal endoscopy, CT scan and allergy testing (with varying GoRs). All ten guidelines provided recommendations on therapy, one treatment, i.e., the use of intranasal steroids, was recommended by all guidelines (with varying GoRs). Recommendations for surgical treatment of CRS were provided by five guidelines. CONCLUSION: We performed an extensive search and included ten (inter)national guidelines on CRS for adults. According to AGREE II, five were of good or sufficient quality. Overall, there was much variation between guidelines in recommended diagnostic test or treatment, direction of evidence and GoR. We found consensus for nasal endoscopy, CT scan, allergy testing and intranasal steroids. We argue for standardization of guideline development, to increase their quality and improve comparability.

[Costs and financing of oral healthcare in the Netherlands]. / Kosten en financiering van de mondzorg.

In the Netherlands, dental diseases are the third most expensive category of healthcare costs. The total cost of the consumption of oral care gives, however, no insight into the content of the care. Data from health insurers do provide such insight, but due to limitations in reimbursements the data from health insurers represent only part of all the costs of oral care. In this study an attempt was made, by means of an estimation, to gain insight into the total cost of oral care, financed both by basic and supplementary health insurance and by the patients themselves . This estimation was made at the level of UPT clusters and is based on data from the health insurers and a large factoring company for the years 2011, 2013 and 2014. Based on this estimate, one can conclude that on average between 21% and 32% of oral care consumption is financed privately. A complete picture of the costs of oral care is important in determining the contribution of oral care to public health. The structure of the current financial system, however, impedes transparency concerning oral care consumed.

Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review.

Caries progression seems to follow universal, predictable rates, depending largely on the caries severity in populations: the higher the caries severity, the higher the progression rates. Quantification of these rates would allow prediction of future caries increments. Our aim was to describe caries progression rates in the primary and permanent dentition in Western populations (not in lesions) of children and adolescents. Therefore, we systematically searched MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane library for studies reporting caries progression data. Eligibility criteria were reporting empirical data from at least 2 full-mouth dental caries examinations in a closed cohort during a follow-up of at least 3 y, a first examination after 1974, a second examination before the age of 22 y, caries assessed as dentine caries (d3/D3), and caries reported in dmfs/DMFS (decayed, missing, and filled surfaces), dmft/DMFT (decayed, missing, and filled teeth), or caries-free participants. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, we described the results for the primary and permanent dentition in a systematic review, performed a meta-analysis for the caries incidence rate in the permanent dentition, and conducted multivariate, hierarchical meta-regression analyses for the caries incidence rate and the increments in DMFS and DMFT. Of the 6,343 unique studies retrieved, 43 studies (56,376 participants) were included for systematic review and 32 for meta-analyses (39,429 participants). The annual decline in caries-free children in the permanent dentition ranged from 0.8% to 10.2%. The annual increment ranged from 0.07 to 1.77 in DMFS and from 0.06 to 0.73 in DMFT. The pooled caries incidence rate was 0.11 (0.09-0.13) per person-year at risk. Meta-regression analyses showed that the methods of individual studies influenced pooled caries incidence rates and increments in DMFS and DMFT. This should be taken into account in planning and evaluation of oral health care services. However, the caries incidence rate is promising for prediction of future caries increments in populations.

Improving oral healthcare using academic detailing - design of the ADVOCATE Field Studies.

Background: Academic detailing (AD) is a defined form of educational outreach that can be deployed to intrinsically motivate practitioners towards improving quality of care. This paper describes the design of the ADVOCATE Field Studies. This proof of concept study aims to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and usefulness of AD, reinforced with feedback information to promote prevention-oriented, patient-centred and evidence-based oral healthcare delivery by general dental practitioners (GDPs). Methods: Six groups of GDPs will be recruited; two groups of six to eight GDPs in each of three countries - the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark. GDPs will meet for four Academic Detailing Group (ADG) meetings for open discussions using comparative feedback data to stimulate debate about their dental practice performance and care delivery. Group meetings will be moderated using the AD methodology. Qualitative data will be collected through focus group interviews, an online discussion forum, field notes and debriefs of ADG meetings and analysed by conventional content analysis using MaxQDA software. Discussion: The results of the study will provide novel information on the feasibility, perceived acceptability and usefulness of AD and feedback data for GDPs to improve oral healthcare delivery.

[The content of publications in the Netherlands Journal of Dentistry - an analysis of patterns over time]. / De inhoud van publicaties in het Nederland Tijdschrift voor Tandheelkunde. Een patroonanalyse over de tijd.

In 2018, the Netherlands Journal of Dentistry (NTVT) had been published for 125 years: reason for a systematic look at the subjects that have received attention since 2000. These subjects were subsequently compared to those in Dutch dental publications in international literature and to leading fields in oral health care. The analysis revealed an increase in the attention given to certain fields in the Netherlands Journal of Dentistry, such as public dental health, during the past 18 years and a decrease in the attention given to other subjects, such as basic scientific research. In addition, there was a limited correlation between fields involving the greatest cost of care, such as cariology and preventive dentistry, and research activity. This held true both for international publications and publications in the Netherlands Journal of Dentistry.

Otolaryngologists adhere to evidence-based guidelines for chronic rhinosinusitis.

PURPOSE: To assess awareness of, opinion about and adherence to evidence-based guidelines on chronic rhinosinusitis among Dutch Otolaryngologists. METHODS: We assessed implementation of two guidelines, one Dutch and one European, that are both intended for diagnosis and treatment of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. We invited 485 Otolaryngologists to fill out a questionnaire and report on their opinion on and adherence to the guidelines. The adherence was further tested by 4 clinical case scenarios, derived from guideline recommendations. RESULTS: 166 (34%) completed the questionnaire. 99% of the respondents was aware of one or both guidelines. Most respondents (90%) consider the guidelines as directing or supportive for their clinical practice based on the clinical case scenarios, between 62 and 99% of the respondents act according to guidelines. Concerning diagnosis, CT-imaging is performed more and allergy testing less than recommended. Where multiple treatment options are recommended, the responses are more heterogeneous as a result of this. Nonetheless, high recommended treatment was chosen more often. Otolaryngologists were reluctant in surgical treatment as a first option, which is according to the guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, both the EPOS and CBO guideline are well known among Dutch Otolaryngologists and 90% indicates that the guideline is important in their daily practice. Adherence to the guidelines is sufficient to high. If multiple treatment or diagnostic options are recommended this leads to a more heterogeneous response pattern. Recommendations with a high grade of recommendation were followed up most often.

Quality of reporting and risk of bias in therapeutic otolaryngology publications.

BACKGROUND: High-quality trials have the potential to influence clinical practice. METHODS: Ten otolaryngology journals with the highest 2011 impact factors were selected and publications from 2010 were extracted. From all medical journals, the 20 highest impact factor journals were selected, and publications related to otolaryngology for 2010 and 2011 were extracted. For all publications, the reporting quality and risk of bias were assessed. RESULTS: The impact factor was 1.8-2.8 for otolaryngology journals and 6.0-101.8 for medical journals. Of 1500 otolaryngology journal articles, 262 were therapeutic studies; 94 had a high reporting quality and 5 a low risk of bias. Of 10 967 medical journal articles, 76 were therapeutic studies; 57 had a high reporting quality and 8 a low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Reporting quality was high for 45 per cent of otolaryngology-related publications and 9 per cent met quality standards. General journals had higher impact factors than otolaryngology journals. Reporting quality was higher and risk of bias lower in general journals than in otolaryngology journals. Nevertheless, 76 per cent of articles in high impact factor journals carried a high risk of bias. Better reported and designed studies are the goal, with less risk of bias, especially in otolaryngology journals.

A Consensus-Based Set of Measures for Oral Health Care.

Increasingly more responsive and accountable health care systems are demanded, which is characterized by transparency and explicit demonstration of competence by health care providers and the systems in which they work. This study aimed to establish measures of oral health for transparent and explicit reporting of routine data to facilitate more patient-centered and prevention-oriented oral health care. To accomplish this, an intermediate objective was to develop a comprehensive list of topics that a range of stakeholders would perceive as valid, important, and relevant for describing oral health and oral health care. A 4-stage approach was used to develop the list of topics: 1) scoping of literature and its appraisal, 2) a meeting of experts, 3) a 2-stage Delphi process (online), and 4) a World Café discussion. The aim was to create consensus through structured conversations via a range of stakeholders (general dental practitioners, patients, insurers, and policy makers) from the Netherlands, Germany, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Hungary, and Denmark. The study was part of the ADVOCATE project, and it resulted in a list of 48 topics grouped into 6 clusters: 1) access to dental care, 2) symptoms and diagnosis, 3) health behaviors, 4) oral treatments, 5) oral prevention, and 6) patient perception. All topics can be measured, as they all have a data source with defined numerators and denominators. This study is the first to establish a comprehensive and multiple-stakeholder consented topic list designed for guiding the implementation of transparent and explicit measurement of routine data of oral health and oral health care. Successful measurement within oral health care systems is essential to facilitate learning from variation in practice and outcomes within and among systems, and it potentiates improvement toward more patient-centered and prevention-oriented oral health care.

Toward More Patient-Centered and Prevention-Oriented Oral Health Care: The ADVOCATE Project.

ADVOCATE (Added Value for Oral Care) is a project funded by the European Commission's Horizon 2020 program, which aims to develop strategies for a system transition toward more patient-centered and prevention-oriented oral health care delivery within health care systems. This system should balance the restorative and preventive approaches in dental and oral health care. ADVOCATE is a partnership among 6 European Union member states, which involves collaboration among universities, state-funded health care providers, and private insurance companies in Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Aridhia, a biomedical informatics company based in Scotland. There are 6 interrelated work packages, which aim to address the following objectives: 1) in-depth evaluation of oral health care systems in European Union member states to identify best system designs for oral disease prevention, 2) development of a set of measures to provide information on oral care delivery and oral health outcomes, 3) evaluation of a feedback approach in dental practice that aims to facilitate a change toward preventive oral health care delivery, and 4) economic evaluation of strategies to promote preventive oral health care and development of policy recommendations for oral health care systems. The project is novel in its use of data that are routinely collected by health insurance organizations, as well as the engagement of key stakeholders from dental teams, insurers, patients, and policy makers in guiding the development and progress of the project. This article outlines in detail the objectives and research methodology of the ADVOCATE project and its anticipated impact. Knowledge Transfer Statement: This commentary describes the development of policy options to promote a greater focus on disease prevention in general dental practice. The approach builds on identifying the comparative effectiveness of alternative incentive schemes, as well as methods to monitor clinical and patient-derived measures of success in creating health for patients. The article describes the development and application of the measures and the evaluation of their success in orienting clinical practice more toward disease prevention.

Associations of pain intensity and pain-related disability with psychological and socio-demographic factors in patients with temporomandibular disorders: a cross-sectional study at a specialised dental clinic.

The study assessed whether psychological and socio-demographic factors, including somatisation, depression, stress, anxiety, daytime sleepiness, optimism, gender and age, are associated with pain intensity and pain-related disability in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). In total, 320 TMD patients were involved in the study. The psychological status of each patient was assessed with questionnaires, including the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90), Epworth Sleeping Scale (ESS), stress questionnaire and Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R). TMD pain, including pain intensity and pain-related disability, was assessed with characteristic pain intensity (CPI) and disability points scales. The associations of psychological and socio-demographic factors with pain intensity and pain-related disability were assessed through logistic regression analyses. Higher pain intensity was significantly associated with more severe anxiety (P = 0·004), more severe somatisation (P < 0·001), more severe depression (P < 0·001), more severe stress (P = 0·001) and lower optimism (P = 0·025) in univariate regression analyses. However, multiple regression analysis showed that only somatisation was significantly associated with pain intensity (P < 0·001). Higher pain-related disability was significantly associated with more severe anxiety (P < 0·001), more severe somatisation (P < 0·001), more severe depression (P < 0·001), more severe stress (P < 0·001) and lower optimism (P = 0·003) in univariate regression analyses. However, multiple regression analysis showed that only depression was significantly associated with pain-related disability (P = 0·003). Among the psychological and socio-demographic factors in this study, somatisation was the best predictor of pain intensity, while depression was the best predictor of pain-related disability.

Improving oral healthcare: towards measurement?

In the last 30 years oral healthcare is increasingly being contested. Needs and expectations have evolved to a point of advanced restorative techniques, long term planning for preventative care and evidence-based practice, and patients and payers increasingly require more explicit demonstration of competence. However, relevant data are currently not routinely collected that would support approaches needed to further improve oral health and care. This paper sets out the case to collect and evaluate routinely available data. Variations in care and oral health could be described, which in turn would provide valuable insights for all wishing to further improve oral health and care.

Does integrated training in evidence-based medicine (EBM) in the general practice (GP) specialty training improve EBM behaviour in daily clinical practice? A cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is an important element in the general practice (GP) specialty training. Studies show that integrating EBM training into clinical practice brings larger benefits than stand-alone modules. However, these studies have neither been performed in GP nor assessed EBM behaviour of former trainees in daily clinical practice. SETTING: GP specialty training in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: All 82 third year GP trainees who started their final third year in 2011 were approached for inclusion, of whom 79 (96%) participated: 39 in the intervention group and 40 in the control group. INTERVENTION: Integrated EBM training, in which EBM is embedded closely within the clinical context by joint assignments for the trainee and supervisor in daily practice, and teaching sessions based on dilemmas from actual patient consultations. COMPARISON: Stand-alone EBM training at the institute only. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Our primary outcome was EBM behaviour, assessed by measuring guideline adherence (incorporating rational, motivated deviation) and information-seeking behaviour. Our secondary outcomes were EBM attitude and EBM knowledge. Data were acquired using logbooks and questionnaires, respectively. Analyses were performed using mixed models. RESULTS: Logbook data were available from 76 (96%) of the participating trainees at baseline (7614 consultations), 60 (76%) at the end of the third year (T1, 4973 consultations) and 53 (67%) 1 year after graduation (T2, 3307 consultations). We found no significant differences in outcomes between the 2 groups, with relative risks for guideline adherence varying between 0.96 and 0.99 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.11) at T1, and 0.99 and 1.10 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.25) at T2, and for information-seeking behaviour between 0.97 and 1.16 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.91) and 0.90 and 1.10 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.32), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated EBM training compared with stand-alone EBM training does not improve EBM behaviour, attitude or knowledge of (future) GPs.

Diagnostic value of a heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP) bedside test in suspected acute coronary syndrome in primary care.

BACKGROUND: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of a rapid heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP) test in patients suspected of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in primary care. METHODS: General practitioners included 298 patients suspected of ACS. In all patients, whether referred to hospital or not, ECG and cardiac biomarker testing was performed. ACS was determined in accordance with international guidelines. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the value of H-FABP in addition to clinical findings. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 66 years (SD 14), 52% was female and 66 patients (22%) were diagnosed with ACS. The H-FABP bedside test was performed within 24h (median 3.1, IQR 1.5 to 7.1) after symptom onset. The positive predictive value (PPV) of H-FABP was 65% (95% confidence interval (CI) 50-78). The negative predictive value (NPV) was 85% (95% CI 80-88). Sensitivity was 39% (29-51%) and specificity 94% (90-96%). Within 6h after symptom onset, the PPV was 72% (55-84) and the NPV was 83% (77-88), sensitivity 43% (31-57%) and specificity 94% (89-97%). Adding the H-FABP test to a diagnostic model for ACS led to an increase in the area under the receiver operating curve from 0.66 (95% CI 0.58-0.73) to 0.75 (95% CI 0.68-0.82). CONCLUSION: The H-FABP rapid test provides modest additional diagnostic certainty in primary care. It cannot be used to safely exclude rule out ACS. The test can only be used safely in patients otherwise NOT referred to hospital by the GP, as an extra precaution not to miss ACS ('rule in').

The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the value of a pelvic X-ray compared to clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic ring fractures, using computed tomography (CT) as the gold standard, in alert [Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≥ 13] adult blunt trauma patients in the emergency room. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Embase. The results were screened on their titles and abstracts using in- and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, the selected articles were critically appraised for their relevance and validity. RESULTS: Two studies investigating the diagnostic value of clinical examination and pelvic X-ray compared to CT were identified. Both studies demonstrate higher negative predictive values for clinical examination [0.99 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.0) and 1.0 (95% CI 0.99-1.0)] compared to the negative predictive values of pelvic X-ray [0.98 (95% CI 0.93-0.99) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.99-1.0)]. The positive predictive values for clinical examination were low [0.18 (95% CI 0.16-0.23) and 0.35 (95% CI 0.30-0.42)] compared to pelvic X-ray [0.97 (95% CI 0.96-0.98) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.90-0.99)]. CONCLUSIONS: In alert blunt trauma patients, pelvic X-ray only has additional diagnostic value for the detection of pelvic ring fractures if the clinical examination is positive. Pelvic X-ray should not be performed if the clinical examination is negative. In this manner, the expenditure of time, costs, and radiation are optimized.

Diagnosing acute coronary syndrome in primary care: comparison of the physicians' risk estimation and a clinical decision rule.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in a primary care setting poses a diagnostic dilemma for physicians. OBJECTIVE: We directly compared the diagnostic accuracy of a clinical decision rule (CDR) based on history taking and physical examination in suspected ACS with the risk estimates of the attending GP. METHODS: In a prospective multicenter study, patients suspected of ACS were included by the GP. GPs were asked to estimate the probability (0%-100%) of the presence of ACS. GPs collected patient data, but they were not aware of the CDR and did not score the patient accordingly. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-eight patients were included (52% female, mean age 66 years, 22% ACS). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was 0.75 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.82] for the GP risk estimate and 0.66 (95% CI 0.58-0.73) for the CDR. There was an agreement between the risk estimation of the GP and a CDR in 51% and the prevalence of ACS in predefined low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups was similar for the GP and CDR estimates. In the low-risk group, according to the GP, four patients (8.2%) suffered an ACS. These four patients were all identified by the decision rule as high risk. CONCLUSIONS: The GP classified patients as ACS or no ACS more adequately than the CDR, judged by the AUC. However, the use of a CDR in patients that are considered at low risk for ACS by the GP could reduce the amount of missed myocardial infarctions.

Systematic review shows lowered risk of nonunion after reamed nailing in patients with closed tibial shaft fractures.

Nonunion after intramedullary nailing (IMN) in patients with tibial shaft fractures occurs up to 16%. There is no agreement whether reaming prior to IMN insertion would reduce the nonunion rate. We aimed to compare the nonunion rate between reamed and unreamed IMN in patients with tibial shaft fractures. A systematic search was conducted in Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The selected publications were: (1) randomised controlled trials; (2) comparing the nonunion rate; (3) in patients with tibial shaft fractures; (4) treated with either reamed or unreamed IMN. Seven studies that satisfied the criteria were identified. They showed that reamed IMN led to reduction of nonunion rate compared to unreamed IMN in closed tibial shaft fractures (risk difference ranging 7.0-20%, number needed to treat ranging 5-14), while the difference between compared treatments for open tibial shaft fractures was not clinically relevant. The evidence showed a consistent trend of reduced nonunion rate in closed tibial shaft fracture treated with reamed compared to unreamed IMN.

Adverse events of low- to medium-dose oral glucocorticoids in inflammatory diseases: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically analyse the literature on reported adverse events of low- to medium-dose glucocorticoids during >or=1 month for inflammatory diseases. METHODS: Data were systematically retrieved and selected from PUBMED, EMBASE and CINAHL databases (6097 hits). RESULTS: A total of 28 studies (2382 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The risk of adverse events over all studies was 150 per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval (CI) 132 to 169). Psychological and behavioural adverse events (eg, minor mood disturbances) were most frequently reported, followed by gastrointestinal events (eg, dyspepsia, dysphagia). In 14 studies comprising 796 patients with rheumatoid arthritis the risk of adverse events was 43/100 patient-years (95% CI 30 to 55), in 4 studies of 167 patients with polymyalgia rheumatica the risk of adverse events was 80/100 patient-years (95% CI 15 to 146), and in 10 studies of 1419 patients with inflammatory bowel disease the risk of adverse events was 555/100 patient-years (95% CI 391 to 718). High rates of adverse events were reported in high-quality studies with short follow-up, notably in studies of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of adverse events depends on study design and disease. Studies on inflammatory bowel disease were often of short duration with frequent documentation of adverse events which resulted in higher adverse event rates whereas, in studies of rheumatoid arthritis, the longer follow-up may have resulted in lower adverse event rates. In most studies aimed at efficacy of glucocorticoids or other drugs, adverse events were not systematically assessed. Clear guidelines on assessment of adverse events are lacking.

Traction for low-back pain with or without sciatica.

BACKGROUND: Traction is used to treat low-back pain (LBP), often with other treatments. OBJECTIVES: To determine traction's effectiveness, compared to reference treatments, placebo, sham traction or no treatment for LBP. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2006, issue 4), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL to October 2006, references in relevant reviews and personal files. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving traction to treat acute (less than four weeks duration), sub-acute (four to 12 weeks) or chronic (more than 12 weeks) non-specific LBP with or without sciatica. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study selection, methodological quality assessment and data extraction were done independently by two authors. As there were insufficient data for statistical pooling, we performed a qualitative analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We included 25 RCTs (2206 patients; 1045 receiving traction). Five trials were considered high quality. For patients with mixed symptom patterns (acute, sub-acute and chronic LBP with and without sciatica) there is: strong evidence of no statistically significant difference in outcomes between traction as a single treatment and placebo, sham or no treatment; moderate evidence that traction as a single treatment is no more effective than other treatments; limited evidence of no significant difference in outcomes between a standard physical therapy program with or without continuous traction. For LBP patients with sciatica (with acute, sub-acute or chronic pain), there is conflicting evidence in several comparisons: autotraction compared to placebo, sham or no treatment; other forms of traction compared to other treatments; different forms of traction. In other comparisons, there were no statistically significant differences; the evidence is moderate for continuous or intermittent traction compared to placebo, sham or no treatment, and limited for light versus normal force traction. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results of the available studies involving mixed groups of acute, sub-acute and chronic patients with LBP with and without sciatica were quite consistent, indicating that continuous or intermittent traction as a single treatment for LBP is not likely effective for this group. Traction for patients with sciatica cannot be judged effective at present either, due to inconsistent results and methodological problems in most studies. We conclude that traction as a single treatment for LBP is probably not effective. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Any future research on traction for patients with LBP should distinguish between symptom pattern and duration, and should be carried out according to the highest methodological standards.