Clarifying values: an updated review

Background

Consensus guidelines have recommended that decision aids include a process for helping patients clarify their values. We sought to examine the theoretical and empirical evidence related to the use of values clarification methods in patient decision aids.

Methods

Building on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration’s 2005 review of values clarification methods in decision aids, we convened a multi-disciplinary expert group to examine key definitions, decision-making process theories, and empirical evidence about the effects of values clarification methods in decision aids. To summarize the current state of theory and evidence about the role of values clarification methods in decision aids, we undertook a process of evidence review and summary.

Results

Values clarification methods (VCMs) are best defined as methods to help patients think about the desirability of options or attributes of options within a specific decision context, in order to identify which option he/she prefers. Several decision making process theories were identified that can inform the design of values clarification methods, but no single “best” practice for how such methods should be constructed was determined. Our evidence review found that existing VCMs were used for a variety of different decisions, rarely referenced underlying theory for their design, but generally were well described in regard to their development process. Listing the pros and cons of a decision was the most common method used. The 13 trials that compared decision support with or without VCMs reached mixed results: some found that VCMs improved some decision-making processes, while others found no effect.

Conclusions

Values clarification methods may improve decision-making processes and potentially more distal outcomes. However, the small number of evaluations of VCMs and, where evaluations exist, the heterogeneity in outcome measures makes it difficult to determine their overall effectiveness or the specific characteristics that increase effectiveness.

     

A Project to Implement Use of 40% Dextrose Gel for Transient Neonatal Hypoglycemia

ObjectiveTo examine the effect of oral dextrose gel and oral feedings on newborns’ blood sugar homeostasis in the first day of life in an effort to decrease transfers to the NICU.DesignEvidence-based practice project.Setting/Local ProblemObstetric service at a large hospital in northeast Ohio with approximately 5,300 births annually. Neonates who experienced hypoglycemia were often transferred to the NICU for management if treatment measures failed, thereby increasing the cost of care and separating mothers from their newborns. During 2018, there were 54 neonates transferred to the NICU for hypoglycemia.ParticipantsPediatricians, neonatologists, neonatal nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, managers, educators, and registered nurses.Intervention/MeasurementsAn interdisciplinary task force created a nurse-driven protocol and associated order set and also created and provided interdisciplinary education to all involved caregivers using a multimodal approach. Neonates’ charts were audited for the time period of April 2019 to April 2020 to evaluate participants’ compliance with the prescribed practice changes.ResultsThe number of neonates who qualified for blood glucose testing per the new protocol totaled 1,369. Of these, 188 (14%) met criteria for and were treated with 40% dextrose gel. Treatment with 40% dextrose gel was unsuccessful for 25 neonates, who were then transferred to the NICU. This is 29 fewer than were transferred in 2018.ConclusionThe use of oral dextrose gel and oral feedings was associated with a decrease in the number of newborns transferred to a higher level of care for treatment of hypoglycemia.     

Transforaminal and systemic diffusion of an active agent from a zinc oxide eugenol-based endodontic sealer containing hydrocortisone—in an in vivo model

Objectives

This study aimed to quantify in vivo the release of hydrocortisone acetate (HCA) contained in a zinc oxide eugenol-based endodontic sealer, in various tissues.

Materials and methods

Roots of human teeth, shaped with One Shape single file and sealed with Endomethasone N, previously radiolabelled with tritium (³H-HCA), were implanted in the back of 24 mice. Mice were sacrificed at 2, 8, 24, and 48 h to evaluate and quantify the amount of radioactivity in subcutaneous tissues surrounding the apex (periapical-like) of the implanted teeth, blood, spleen, kidneys, liver, and urine.

Results

Radioactivity was released from the apex of the tooth into the periapical-like tissues with a peak measured at 2 h post-implantation (2.25% of the initial radioactivity/g). This quantity decreased significantly over time between 2 h and each time points. Radioactivity was still measured up to 48 h in the periapical-like tissues (0.42% of the initial radioactivity). The same pattern of kinetic was observed for all organs. The total quantity of radioactivity significantly decreased over time from 4.36% measured 2 h post-implantation to 0.74% at 48 h. Finally, about 10% of the initial radioactivity from Endomethasone N used to fill the root canal was retrieved after 48 h in the urine.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that radioactive-HCA from Endomethasone N can diffuse through the apex of the root canal and follow a classical pharmacokinetics.

Clinical relevance

This mouse model shows that radioactive-HCA can diffuse through the apex and do not accumulate in periapical-like tissues and organs.

     

International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries: 2. Avulsion of permanent teeth

Avulsion of permanent teeth is one of the most serious dental injuries. Prompt and correct emergency management is essential for attaining the best outcome after this injury. The International Association of Dental Traumatology (IADT) has developed these Guidelines as a consensus statement after a comprehensive review of the dental literature and working group discussions. It represents the current best evidence and practice based on that literature search and expert opinions. Experienced researchers and clinicians from various specialties and the general dentistry community were included in the working group. In cases where the published data did not appear conclusive, recommendations were based on consensus opinions or majority decisions of the working group. They were then reviewed and approved by the members of the IADT Board of Directors. The purpose of these Guidelines is to provide clinicians with the most widely accepted and scientifically plausible approaches for the immediate or urgent care of avulsed permanent teeth. The IADT does not, and cannot, guarantee favorable outcomes from adherence to the Guidelines. However, the IADT believes that their application can maximize the probability of favorable outcomes.     

International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries: General introduction

Traumatic dental injuries (TDIs) occur most frequently in children and young adults. Older adults also suffer TDIs but at significantly lower rates than individuals in the younger cohorts. Luxation injuries are the most common TDIs in the primary dentition, whereas crown fractures are more commonly reported for the permanent teeth. Proper diagnosis, treatment planning and follow up are very important to assure a favorable outcome. These updates of the International Association of Dental Traumatology's (IADT) Guidelines include a comprehensive review of the current dental literature using EMBASE, MEDLINE, PUBMED, Scopus, and Cochrane Databases for Systematic Reviews searches from 1996 to 2019 and a search of the journal Dental Traumatology from 2000 to 2019. The goal of these guidelines is to provide information for the immediate or urgent care of TDIs. It is understood that some follow‐up treatment may require secondary and tertiary interventions involving dental and medical specialists with experience in dental trauma. As with previous guidelines, the current working group included experienced investigators and clinicians from various dental specialties and general practice. The current revision represents the best evidence based on the available literature and expert opinions. In cases where the published data were not conclusive, recommendations were based on the consensus opinions of the working group. They were then reviewed and approved by the members of the IADT Board of Directors. It is understood that guidelines are to be applied using careful evaluation of the specific clinical circumstances, the clinician's judgment, and the patient's characteristics, including the probability of compliance, finances and a clear understanding of the immediate and long‐term outcomes of the various treatment options vs non‐treatment. The IADT does not, and cannot, guarantee favorable outcomes from adherence to the Guidelines. However, the IADT believes that their application can maximize the probability of favorable outcomes.