Investigating patients´ views on screening for depression in cardiac practice: A qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: Recommendations on screening for depression in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) are highly debated. While recent research has prioritized efficacy studies, little is known about what is potentially required for screening to be efficacious. Expanding our knowledge of how patients with CHD view screening is likely to pose a first step towards addressing this gap. We aimed to investigate patients ́ views on routine screening for depression in cardiac practice. METHODS: This exploratory, qualitative study was conducted among 12 patients with CHD, who completed semi-structured interviews. We used a purposive sampling strategy to include patients within a range of ages, gender and self-reported depression. Thematic analysis was carried out. RESULTS: We identified four main themes: Acceptance, utility, barriers and expectations. Patients in this sample appeared to be in favor of standardized routine screening for depression in cardiac practice, if the rationale was disclosed. Patients reported that standardized screening addresses holistic care demands, promotes validation of individual symptom burden and legitimizes the display of psychological distress in cardiac practice. Yet, skepticism towards the validity of screening instruments and perceived stigmatization could pose a main barrier to screening efficacy. Patients expected to receive feedback on results and consecutive recommendations. CONCLUSION: We found that depression screening is endorsed by patients with CHD in this study sample. Standardized routine screening procedures could serve as a useful tool to combat stigmatization, and encourage patients to display symptoms of depression towards cardiologists. The efficacy of depression screening could potentially be enhanced by tailoring the screening process towards patients´ needs.

Influence of two different surgical techniques on the difficulty of impacted lower third molar extraction and their post-operative complications

BACKGROUND: Post-operative complications of various degrees of severity are commonly observed in third molar impaction surgery. For this reason, a surgical procedure that decreases the trauma of bone and soft tissues should be a priority for surgeons. In the present study, we compare the efficacy and the post-operative complications of patients to whom two different surgical techniques were applied for impacted lower third molar extraction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients of the first group underwent the classical bur technique, while patients of the second group underwent another technique, in which an elevator was placed on the buccal surface of the impacted molar in order to luxate the alveolar socket more easily. RESULTS: Comparing the two techniques, we observed a statistically significant decrease in the duration of the procedure and in the need for tooth sectioning when applying the second surgical technique, while the post-operative complications were similar in the two groups. We also found a statistically significant lower incidence of lingual nerve lesions and only a slightly higher frequency of sharp mandibular bone irregularities in the second group, which however was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study indicate that the surgical technique using an elevator on the buccal surface of the tooth seems to be a reliable method to extract impacted third molars safely, easily, quickly and with the minimum trauma to the surrounding tissues

Influence of two different surgical techniques on the difficulty of impacted lower third molar extraction and their post-operative complications.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative complications of various degrees of severity are commonly observed in third molar impaction surgery. For this reason, a surgical procedure that decreases the trauma of bone and soft tissues should be a priority for surgeons. In the present study, we compare the efficacy and the post-operative complications of patients to whom two different surgical techniques were applied for impacted lower third molar extraction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients of the first group underwent the classical bur technique, while patients of the second group underwent another technique, in which an elevator was placed on the buccal surface of the impacted molar in order to luxate the alveolar socket more easily. RESULTS: Comparing the two techniques, we observed a statistically significant decrease in the duration of the procedure and in the need for tooth sectioning when applying the second surgical technique, while the post-operative complications were similar in the two groups. We also found a statistically significant lower incidence of lingual nerve lesions and only a slightly higher frequency of sharp mandibular bone irregularities in the second group, which however was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study indicate that the surgical technique using an elevator on the buccal surface of the tooth seems to be a reliable method to extract impacted third molars safely, easily, quickly and with the minimum trauma to the surrounding tissues.