Impact of patient-related factors on complications when treating mandibular fractures by load-sharing and load-bearing osteosynthesis

The decision about the choice of load-sharing (LS) or load-bearing (LB) osteosynthesis is determined by an interplay of fracture-related and patient-related factors. In some situations a similar fracture in two different patients may be treated successfully by either of these methods. Our aim was to identify preoperative patient-related factors that may assist in deciding which form of osteosynthesis is employed. All adult patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular fractures (excluding condyle) between 1 October 2018 and 1 June 2021 were retrospectively identified. The odds of developing postoperative complications and requiring a return to theatre (RTT) were calculated for each method of fixation together with the following patient factors: smoking, excess alcohol, substance misuse, and severe mental health issues. Of 337 fractures treated using LS principles, 27 (8%) developed complications, of which 20 (6%) required a RTT for repeat osteosynthesis. Of 74 fractures treated using LB principles, seven (10%) developed complications and two (3%) required a RTT for repeat osteosynthesis. The only patient factor that had statistically significant increased odds of a complication requiring RTT was LS osteosynthesis in patients who admitted drinking excess alcohol (OR = 7.83, p = 0.00, 95% CI = 3.13 to 19.60). Complications when treating mandibular fractures are rarely reported in the literature, and lack standardisation in their clinical significance. Figures generally represent overall numbers of patients, whereas the number of individual fractures treated is more accurate. In our study complications occurred in 8% of treated fractures and 10% of patients. The RTT rate was 7% of patients, which compares favourably with a recently stated standard of 10% of patients, as suggested by the Getting it Right First Time (GIRFT) report.     

Community pharmacist's perspective regarding patient-centred communication in conjunction with pharmaceutical practice: A cross-sectional survey

Effective communication between pharmacists and patients is essential for therapeutic success. The pharmacist's perspective may differ from that of the patient in terms of effective communication. Our study aimed to assess the communication efficiency in the pharmacist-patient relationship from the pharmacists’ perspective. We hypothesize that the community pharmacist's perspective can lead to relevant aspects of patient-centred communication and their profession. A cross-sectional study was conducted through an online questionnaire addressed to pharmacists. A number of 506 questionnaires were collected, evaluated, analyzed and interpreted. The questionnaire focused on the following main issues: degree of job satisfaction, essential skills of a pharmacist working in a community pharmacy, different aspects of pharmacist-patient communication, shared decision-making, patient monitoring plan and other elements related to a patient under treatment (healthy lifestyle, receptivity to counselling, loyalty and appreciation of pharmaceutical services). The pharmacist's efficiency in communication with the patient and professional education were also targeted in the study. There are no significant differences between job satisfaction in women compared to men. However, the job satisfaction increases with the average age. Caregiver, communicator and life-long learner were identified as essential skills of a pharmacist. Pharmacists participating in the study generally perceive themselves as good communicators with the patient. Nevertheless, many particular aspects of communication with patients can be greatly improved. The lack of training in the spirit of the ?patient-centred communication” concept has been identified. Still, more than a third of the respondents are missing the need for professional training. A periodic evaluation of the efficiency of pharmacist-patient communication in the community pharmacy is necessary. The degree of subjectivity of the pharmacist from this perspective and self-sufficiency would be significantly diminished if the pharmacists had access to the results of the periodic evaluations.     

Intravenous medication errors in the emergency department,knowledge, tendency to make errors and affecting factors: An observational study

BackgroundIntravenous medication errors are common in hospital settings particularly emergency department. This study aimed to determine intravenous medication preparation and administration errors, contributing factors, tendency towards making errors and knowledge level of emergency department healthcare workers.MethodsA cross-sectional study using a structured, direct observation method was conducted. It was conducted with 23 emergency healthcare workers working in the emergency department of a university hospital in Turkey. Data were collected by questionnaires: Knowledge Test on Intravenous Medication Administration, Intravenous Drug Administration Standard Observation Form, Drug and Transfusion Administration Sub-Dimension scale, Perceived Stress Scale and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.ResultsIt was determined that the knowledge level of the emergency healthcare workers about intravenous medication administration was moderate, and the tendency mistakes regarding drug and transfusion applications was very low. There was no relationship between education level, years of work, years of work in the emergency department, perceived stress level and sleep quality, and the tendency of making mistakes in drug and transfusion applications.ConclusionIt is important for patient safety to prevent medication errors by determining the factors affecting intravenous medication administration, tendency to make mistakes and knowledge levels, which are frequently used in emergency department.     

Patient acceptable symptom state for patient-reported outcomes in people with non-specific chronic low back pain

BackgroundThe patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) is a treatment-response criterion developed to determine the clinical relevance of a treatment effect. Its estimates for some patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in non-specific chronic low back pain (cLBP) are lacking and the stability of PRO estimates between independent cLBP populations is unknown. We hypothesized that these PRO estimates will be stable.ObjectivesTo estimate and compare the PASS for PROs between 2 independent cLBP populations.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (PREDID) and a cohort of outpatients with non-specific cLBP. Using an anchoring question, participants who self-rated their health as “excellent”, “very good” or “good” at 1 month were considered to have an acceptable symptom state. PASS estimates for 5 PROs were calculated by using the 75th percentile method. Estimates were compared between the 2 populations with bootstrap resampling.ResultsA total of 256 participants with non-specific cLBP were included: 135 patients with cLBP and active discopathy from the PREDID trial and 121 outpatients with cLBP without active discopathy followed up in an independent cohort. Overall, 137/256 (54%) participants had an acceptable symptom state at 1 month. PASS estimates were 47.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 40.0 to 50.0)/100 for lumbar pain (0, no pain and 100, maximal pain), 30.5 (30.0 to 40.0)/100 for radicular pain, 39.3 (33.6 to 45.3)/100 for Quebec Back Pain Disability score (0, no disability and 100, maximal disability), 10.0 (9.2 to 10.0)/21 for the Hospital Anxiety Depression anxiety subscale (0, no anxiety, and 21, maximal anxiety) and 6.7 (6.0 to 8.0)/21 for the depression subscale (0, no depression, and 21, maximal depression). PASS estimates did not differ between the 2 populations.ConclusionsOur study provides PASS estimates for 5 PROs commonly used in cLBP. Our estimates were stable between 2 independent populations of people with cLBP. The stability of our PASS estimates suggests that they are relevant for interpreting PRO values in clinical trials and practice. ClinicalTrials.gov no. (PREDID trial) NCT00804531.     

Effects of nutrients on immunomodulation in patients with severe COVID-19: Current knowledge

Recent research has demonstrated that critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) show significant immune system dysregulation. Due to that, some nutrients that influence immunomodulation have been suggested as a form of treatment against the infection. This review collected the information on the impact of vitamins on the prognosis of COVID-19, with the intention of facilitating treatment and prevention of the disease risk status in patients. The collected information was obtained using the PubMed electronic database by searching for articles that relate COVID-19 and the mechanisms/effects of the nutrients: Proteins, glucose, lipids, vitamin B12, vitamin D, calcium, iron, copper, zinc, and magnesium, including prospective, retrospective, and support articles. The findings reveal an optimal response related mainly to omega-3, eicosapentaenoic acid, docosahexaenoic acid, calcium, and iron that might represent benefits in the treatment of critically ill patients. However, nutrient supplementation should be done with caution due to the limited availability of randomized controlled studies.