Variability in non-core vaccination rates of dogs and cats in veterinary clinics across the United States

Vaccination guidelines for dogs and cats indicate that core vaccines (for dogs, rabies, distemper, adenovirus, parvovirus; for cats, feline parvovirus, herpes virus-1, calicivirus) are essential to maintain health, and that non-core vaccines be administered according to a clinician’s assessment of a pet’s risk of exposure and susceptibility to infection. A reliance on individual risk assessment introduces the potential for between-practice inconsistencies in non-core vaccine recommendations. A study was initiated to determine non-core vaccination rates of dogs (Leptospira, Borrelia burgdorferi, Bordetella bronchiseptica, canine influenza virus) and cats (feline leukemia virus) in patients current for core vaccines in veterinary practices across the United States. Transactional data for 5,531,866 dogs (1,670 practices) and 1,914,373 cats (1,661 practices) were retrieved from practice management systems for the period November 1, 2016 through January 1, 2020, deidentified and normalized. Non-core vaccination status was evaluated in 2,798,875 dogs and 788,772 cats that were core-vaccine current. Nationally, median clinic vaccination rates for dogs were highest for leptospirosis (70.5%) and B. bronchiseptica (68.7%), and much lower for canine influenza (4.8%). In Lyme-endemic states, the median clinic borreliosis vaccination rate was 51.8%. Feline leukemia median clinic vaccination rates were low for adult cats (34.6%) and for kittens and 1-year old cats (36.8%). Individual clinic vaccination rates ranged from 0 to 100% for leptospirosis, B. bronchiseptica and feline leukemia, 0–96% for canine influenza, and 0–94% for borreliosis. Wide variation in non-core vaccination rates between clinics in similar geographies indicates that factors other than disease risk are driving the use of non-core vaccines in pet dogs and cats, highlighting a need for veterinary practices to address gaps in patient protection. Failure to implement effective non-core vaccination strategies leaves susceptible dogs and cats unprotected against vaccine-preventable diseases.     

Silver Diamine Fluoride Protocol for Reducing Preventable Dental Hospitalisations in Victorian Children

IntroductionThis study was designed to assess whether a dental caries management protocol combining a single application of 38% silver diamine fluoride (SDF) with comprehensive oral health education will successfully divert high-risk children from dental treatment under dental general anaesthesia (DGA), arrest active caries in primary teeth, and improve parent-reported child oral health–related quality of life (OHRQoL).MethodsChildren aged 2 to 10 years, who attended two public dental agencies in Victoria, Australia, and were unable to tolerate restorative treatments in the clinic setting, elected to participate in either a 38% SDF intervention protocol or, alternatively, referral for DGA. Follow-up examinations were completed at 6 months to assess caries progression, decayed missing filled tooth index, PUFA index (pulpal involvement, ulceration, fistula, abscess), DGA referral rates, and OHRQoL (Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale [ECOHIS]).ResultsOf the total sample, 89.5% of children (n = 102) [mean (SD) age, 4.1 (1.0) years] with 401 active carious lesions elected to participate in the 38% SDF protocol; 10.5% (n = 12) of parents opted for referral for treatment under DGA. The proportion of active caries subsequently arrested at follow-up (number of arrested lesions/number of lesions treated) was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.87). There was an 88% reduction in referrals for DGA in eligible children over the 6-month period. The 38% SDF intervention group showed a significant improvement in ECOHIS scores at follow-up (P < .001).DiscussionAdoption of the 38% SDF intervention protocol resulted in a significant reduction in the rate of preventable dental hospitalisations. Most parents opted against referral for DGA. Parent-reported OHRQoL for children improved significantly.     

Prosthetic treatment in the adult French population: Prevalence and relation with demographic,socioeconomic and medical characteristics

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of dental prosthetic treatment and to investigate the demographic, social, economic and medical factors associated with the use of fixed and removable dentures in a representative sample of adults living in France.MethodsThe data were obtained from the 2002–2003 Decennial Health Survey, a cross-sectional study of a representative sample of the population living in France, which included 29,679 adults. Information was collected by interview. The variables collected were fixed denture, removable denture, age, gender, number of children, area of residence, nationality, educational attainment, family social status, employment status, annual household income per capita, supplementary insurance, chronic disease, eyesight problems/glasses, hearing problems/hearing aids. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to study the relationship between prosthetic treatment and demographic, socioeconomic and medical characteristics unadjusted, adjusted for age and adjusted for all the characteristics.ResultsThe prevalence of prosthetic treatment was 34.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): [34.1; 35.2]) for fixed prosthetic dentures and 13.8% (95% CI: [13.4; 14.2]) for removable prosthetic dentures. We showed a gradient between educational attainment and removable dentures; the odds ratio adjusted for all the variables (aOR) associated with no or primary education compared to post-secondary education was 2.56; 95% CI: [2.09; 3.13]. When annual household income per capita was low, subjects were less likely to report fixed dentures (aOR = 0.68; 95% CI: [0.62; 0.75]) than those with high annual household income per capita. Individuals without insurance less often reported fixed dentures than those with private insurance. Those reporting chronic disease were less likely to report fixed dentures (aOR = 0.87; 95% CI: [0.79; 0.95]) but more likely to report removable dentures (aOR = 1.29; 95% CI: [1.17; 1.43]) than those without chronic disease.ConclusionThis study reveals social, economic and medical inequalities in fixed and removable prosthetic treatment among adults in France.     

Outcomes of Prostatectomy versus Radiation Therapy in the Management of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Patients Within the PLCO Trial

Background

The objective of the study was to evaluate the outcomes of clinically localized prostate cancer treated with prostatectomy versus radiation therapy within the context of a prospective prostate cancer screening study.