Emergency Department and Dental Clinic Perceptions of Appropriate, and Preventable, Use of the ED for Non-Traumatic Dental Conditions in Hot-Spot Counties: A Mixed Methods Study.

OBJECTIVES: Frequency of emergency department (ED) use for nontraumatic dental conditions (NTDC) is a well-researched community health concern. However, research predominately relies on ambulatory ED discharge records. This explanatory sequential mixed methods study reviewed NTDC ED use in hot-spot counties and assessed perceptions around preventable and appropriate use among EDs and dental clinics. METHODS: Tooth pain data (2015-2021) were drawn from State Medicaid, and the Early Notification of Community-Based Epidemics (ESSENCE). NTDC data were compiled using International Classification of Disease, Ninth and Tenth Revisions. Employing extreme case sampling, providers in counties with the highest per-capita NTDC ED use were interviewed. RESULTS: North Dakota experienced a decline in NTDC ED visits between 2017 and 2020, though the rate is now increasing. The greatest proportion of NTDC ED visits were among persons ages 20 to 34 and 35 to 44. ED and dental care staff have misconceptions around each other's roles in reducing NTDC ED visits, but unanimously suggest community-level prevention as a solution. CONCLUSIONS: NTDC ED use was perceived as "appropriate" care. However, there is consensus that improved access to, and utilization of, affordable and quality preventative dental care would reduce NTDC ED visits and improve overall community health, especially among populations experiencing greater inequities.

An objective assessment of the variability in number of drops per bottle of glaucoma medication.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the number of eyedrops available per bottle of a variety of commonly prescribed glaucoma medications. METHODS: Six bottles of each glaucoma medication were tested: three each in the vertical and horizontal orientations. Bottles were housed in a customized force gauge apparatus designed to mimic ballpoint fingertip contact with a bottle. At a standard rate, all drops were expressed from each bottle and counted with an automated drop counter. Simultaneously, bottle volume was measured and drop size and number were also estimated. The main outcome measures were: total number of drops, volume per bottle and drops per milliliter (mL) of glaucoma medication. RESULTS: A total of 192 bottles from 32 bottle designs and manufacturers were tested. Twenty-two of the 32 bottle designs had a significantly different mean number of drops in the vertical and horizontal positions, with 10 designs have more drops dispensed in the horizontal orientation and 12 in the vertical orientation. Six of the 32 bottle designs had a significantly different mean total bottle volume in the vertical and horizontal positions, with all designs having greater volume in the vertical position. An adjusted ratio of mean number of drops/mean bottle volume demonstrated a range from 20.9 drops/mL to 40.8 drops/mL. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in drops and volume available per bottle of glaucoma medication depending on both the bottle position and manufacturer. These data point to the need for circumspection in prescribing glaucoma medications and caution in evaluating therapeutic outcomes.

Squeeze Me if You Can: Variability in Force Requirements to Extract a Drop From Common Glaucoma Bottles.

PURPOSE: To determine the force requirements to dispense a single drop from commonly prescribed brand and generic topical glaucoma medications and correlate these findings with pinch strength in a representative patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four bottles of each medication were tested: 2 in the vertical and 2 in the horizontal orientation. Bottles were housed in a customized force gauge apparatus designed to mimic ballpoint fingertip contact with a bottle tip. For all bottles, each of the first 10 dispensed drops was tested and then tests were performed in increments of 10 until the bottle was empty. For each tested drop, the maximum force and displacement were electronically measured. Concurrently, maximum pinch strength was measured on consecutive glaucoma patients. RESULTS: A total of 84 bottles from 21 bottle designs were tested. There was significant variability across the designs, with roughly a 7-fold (0.67 to 4.49 kgf) and 4-fold (0.81 to 3.00 kgf) difference in force requirements in the vertical and horizontal positions, respectively. Of 53 enrolled patients in the glaucoma clinic, the mean pinch strength was 5.05 (range, 1.23 to 10.4 kgf) and 4.82 (range, 1.47 to 10.67 kgf) kgf for the right and left hands, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There is statistically significant variability in the force required to squeeze a drop from common glaucoma medications, and a representative sampling of clinic patients suggests that many likely struggle with the force requirements of several bottle designs. These data further support standardization of topical glaucoma drug delivery and design.