Endodontics Specialists’ Practice during the Initial Outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019

IntroductionThe first outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States resulted in a nationwide closure of dental offices that created an oral health crisis. The aim of this observational study was to analyze and compare the characteristics of patients who visited 2 private endodontics offices from March 16 to May 31, 2020, compared with the same period in 2019.MethodsDemographic, diagnostic, and procedural data of 1520 (693 in 2020 and 827 in 2019) patient visits were collected. Bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to assess the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on patient-related variables.ResultsBivariate analyses showed that the number of patient visits decreased in April and May 2020 (P < .0001). In 2020, patients’ self-reported pain level was higher, they were more frequently diagnosed with pulp necrosis and acute apical abscess, and they received more incisions for drainage (P < .05). Multiple logistic regression analyses showed that the COVID-19 outbreak was associated with less visits for older patients (>49.5 years) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.720; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.573–0.906), more patients with kidney diseases (OR = 2.690; 95% CI, 1.143–6.331), higher levels of pain on percussion (OR = 2.277; 95% CI, 1.718–3.016), less cases with previously initiated treatment (OR = 0.242; 95% CI, 0.080–0.731), less periapical diagnoses of asymptomatic apical periodontitis (OR = 0.510; 95% CI, 0.306–0.849), and a higher number of nonsurgical root canal treatments (OR = 2.073; 95% CI, 1.397–3.074) and apicoectomies (OR = 2.799; 95% CI, 1.367-5.729).ConclusionsThese findings show that the public health burden of endodontic infections was more intense during the initial outbreak of COVID-19.     

Decreased Incidence of Hirschsprung-Associated Enterocolitis During COVID-19 Across United States Children's Hospitals

BackgroundThe Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic provided a natural experiment to study the effect of social distancing on the risk of developing Hirschsprung's Associated Enterocolitis (HAEC).MethodsUsing the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS), a retrospective cohort study of children (<18 years) with Hirschsprung's Disease (HSCR) across 47 United States children's hospitals was performed. The primary outcome was HAEC admissions per 10,000 patient-days. The exposure (COVID-19) was defined as April 2020–December 2021. The unexposed (historical control) period was April 2018–December 2019. Secondary outcomes included sepsis, bowel perforation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mortality, and length of stay.ResultsOverall, we included 5707 patients with HSCR during the study period. There were 984 and 834 HAEC admissions during the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods, respectively (2.6 vs. 1.9 HAEC admissions per 10,000 patient-days, incident rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.74 [0.67, 0.81], p < 0.001). Compared to pre-pandemic, those with HAEC during the pandemic were younger (median [IQR]: 566 [162, 1430] days pandemic vs. 746 [259, 1609] days pre-pandemic, p < 0.001) and more likely to live in the lowest quartile of median household income zip codes (24% pandemic vs. 19% pre-pandemic, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in rates of sepsis (6.1% pandemic vs. 6.1% pre-pandemic, p > 0.9), bowel perforation (1.3% pandemic vs. 1.2% pre-pandemic, p = 0.8), ICU admissions (9.6% pandemic vs. 12% pre-pandemic, p = 0.2), mortality (0.5% pandemic vs. 0.6% pre-pandemic, p = 0.8), or length of stay (median [interquartile range]: 4 [(Pastor et al., 2009; Gosain and Brinkman, 2015) 2,112,11 days pandemic vs. 5 [(Pastor et al., 2009; Tang et al., 2020) 2,102,10 days pre-pandemic, p = 0.4).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significantly decreased incidence of HAEC admissions across US children's hospitals. Possible etiologies such as social distancing should be explored.Level of evidenceII.     

Murine typhus complicated by sHLH mimicking adult-onset Still's disease

IntroductionAdult-onset Still's disease (AOSD) is a rare multisystemic disorder and a diagnostic challenge for physicians because of the wide range of differential diagnoses. Common features of AOSD and secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (sHLH) could favour diagnostic uncertainty, in particular in case of infection-related sHLH.ObservationA 61-year-old man was admitted to our internal medicine department for suspected AOSD. He reported a 2-week history of sudden onset fever, headaches, myalgia, sore throat, diarrhoea, and an erythematous macular rash of the trunk as well as petechial purpuric lesions on both legs on return from Reunion Island. Laboratory tests found cytopenia, hepatic cytolysis, hypertriglyceridaemia, and hyperferritinaemia. Hemophagocytosis was diagnosed on bone marrow aspiration in favour of the diagnosis of secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (sHLH). Subcutaneous anakinra (100 mg) was initiated to treat sHLH with favourable course. Oral doxycycline was added 3 days later because of atypical features for AOSD diagnosis such as diarrhoea, hypergammaglobulinaemia, and doubtful serologies for Rickettsia and Coxiella. Three weeks later, Rickettsia typhi serology was checked again and revealed an increase in IgG titer > 4 times that confirmed the diagnosis of murine typhus. A diagnosis of murine typhus complicated by sHLH was retained, successfully treated by anakinra and doxycycline.ConclusionOur observation shows that AOSD diagnosis has to be stringent due to the many differential diagnoses, particularly infection complicated by sHLH, which may be rare. It is important to consider murine typhus in patients returning from endemic areas, such as La Reunion or other tropical areas, when they present fever of unknown origin with non-specific clinical features. Moreover, this case illustrates the effectiveness of IL-1 blockers as a treatment for symptomatic sHLH without severity criteria, regardless of the aetiology.     

FDA“治疗等效性评价供企业用指导原则”（草案）介绍

美国食品药品管理局（FDA）于2022年7月发布了"治疗等效性评价供企业用指导原则"（草案）。该指导原则阐明了FDA治疗等效性的标准以及治疗等效性编码系统，目的是准确评价仿制药与参比制剂的治疗等效性并通过治疗等效性代码，在"橙皮书"中迅速检索到治疗等效的仿制药。而中国目前尚无类似的指导原则，详细介绍FDA该指导原则主要内容，期望对中国加强仿制药的治疗等效性评价和加速完善和实施符合国情的治疗等效性编码系统有所帮助。     

2019年重庆市30岁及以上人群归因于被动吸烟的肺癌疾病负担研究

目的 分析重庆市肺癌发病死亡和疾病负担归因于被动吸烟的情况,为开展肺癌防治提供建议。 方法 肺癌死亡个案数据来源于2019年重庆市肿瘤登记报告系统,被动吸烟率来自2013年重庆市慢性病及危险因素监测。计算人群归因危险度百分比(population attributable risk percent, PAR%)、被动吸烟导致的肺癌发病、死亡和疾病负担。采用Excel 2010与SPSS 25.0进行统计分析,率的比较采用χ²检验。 结果 2013年30岁及以上成年人被动吸烟率为52.37%。2019年重庆市30岁及以上人群肺癌发病率与标化发病率分别为118.44/10万与80.83/10万,死亡率与标化死亡率分别为96.51/10万、63.58/10万。肺癌发病率和死亡率归因于被动吸烟的PAR%分别为19.76和19.04,归因发病率与归因标化发病率分别为23.41/10万和16.34/10万,归因死亡率与归因标化死亡率分别为18.38/10万和12.40/10万。2019年重庆市30岁及以上肺癌早死所致寿命损失年率(years of life lost,YLL)、残疾所致寿命损失年率(years lived with disability,YLD)、调整伤残寿命损失年率(disability adjusted life year,DALY)分别为21.16‰、0.31‰、21.47‰,YLL率、YLD率、DALY率归因于被动吸烟的PAR%分别为21.16、19.76和20.49,归因YLL率为4.34‰,归因YLD率为0.06‰,归因DALY率为4.40‰。 结论 2019年重庆市30岁及以上人群肺癌发病率、死亡率、YLL率、DALY率高,被动吸烟率高,肺癌归因于被动吸烟的疾病负担重,应加强落实控烟工作。     

Process evaluation of implementation strategies to reduce potentially inappropriate medication prescribing in older population: A scoping review

ObjectivesSeveral implementation strategies can reduce potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) prescribing. Although use of PIMs has declined in recent years, it remains prevalent. Various strategies exist to improve the appropriateness of medication use. However, little is known about the processes of these different implementation strategies. This scoping review aims to investigate how the process evaluation of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in the older population has been studied.MethodsWe searched for process evaluations of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in PUBMED, SCOPUS and Web of Science published between January 2000 and November 2019 in English. We applied the following inclusion criteria: patients aged ≥65 years, validated PIM criteria, and implementation process evaluated. The review focuses on decision support for health care professionals. We described the findings of the process evaluations, and compared the authors’ concepts of process evaluation of the included publications to those of Proctor et al.( 2010).ResultOf 9131 publications screened, 29 met our inclusion criteria. Different process evaluation conceptualizations were identified. Most process evaluations took place in the initial stages of the process (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, and feasibility) and sustainability and implementation costs were seldom evaluated. None of the included publications evaluated fidelity.Multifaceted interventions were the most studied implementation strategies. Medication review was more common in acceptability evaluations, multidisciplinary interventions in adoption evaluations, and computerized systems and educational interventions in feasibility evaluations. Process evaluations were studied from the health care professionals’ viewpoint in most of the included publications, but the management viewpoint was missing.DiscussionThe conceptualization of process evaluation in the field of PIM prescribing is indeterminate. There is also a current gap in the knowledge of sustainability and implementation costs. Clarifying the conceptualization of implementation process evaluation is essential in order to effectively translate research knowledge into practice.     

Diabetic foot ulcers: A devastating complication of diabetes mellitus continues non-stop in spite of new medical treatment modalities

Diabetic foot ulcer is a devastating complication of diabetes mellitus and significant cause of mortality and morbidity all over the world and can be complex and costly. The development of foot ulcer in a diabetic patient has been estimated to be 19%-34% through their lifetime. The pathophysiology of diabetic foot ulcer consist of neuropathy, trauma and, in many patients, additional peripheral arterial disease. In particular, diabetic neuropathy leads to foot deformity, callus formation, and insensitivity to trauma or pressure. The standard algorithms in diabetic foot ulcer management include assessing the ulcer grade classification, surgical debridement, dressing to facilitate wound healing, off-loading, vascular assessment (status and presence of a chance for interventional vascular correction), and infection and glycemic control. Although especially surgical procedures are sometimes inevitable, they are poor predictive factors for the prognosis of diabetic foot ulcer. Different novel treatment modalities such as nonsurgical debridement agents, oxygen therapies, and negative pressure wound therapy, topical drugs, cellular bioproducts, human growth factors, energy-based therapies, and systematic therapies have been available for patients with diabetic foot ulcer. However, it is uncertain whether they are effective in terms of promoting wound healing related with a limited number of randomized controlled trials. This review aims at evaluating diabetic foot ulcer with regard to all aspects. We will also focus on conventional and novel adjunctive therapy in diabetic foot management.     

Access to Care: End-to-End Digital Response for COVID-19 Care Delivery

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic disrupted health care, requiring organizational leaders to act quickly to manage the health-related concerns of individuals and communities. The ability to offer a variety of digitally enabled telehealth services with 24/7 access to nurse practitioners and physician assistants allowed us to care for patients in their homes. It reduced the spread of the virus, protected our employees from further disease spread, and provided early interventions to those in need. The roles of nurse practitioner leaders, the enacted strategies, and patient outcomes demonstrate the impact of an innovative digital care delivery model on care across the continuum.     

Home Use Guidance for Aerosol-Generating Procedures During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

From the early days of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, there were concerns that nebulizers used for the treatment of respiratory diseases as aerosol-generating devices could enhance the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. However, given the absence of any compelling data showing that nebulized treatments increase the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, it is unnecessary for community-dwelling patients with respiratory diseases to alter their current therapies, including nebulized treatments, to prevent symptom exacerbations. Maintaining current inhaled therapies also minimizes the risk of hospitalization and hospital-acquired infection of SARS-CoV-2.