Assessing health status over time: impact of recall period and anchor question on the minimal clinically important difference of copd health status tools.

BACKGROUND: The Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) assesses what change on a measurement tool can be considered minimal clinically relevant. Although the recall period can influence questionnaire scores, it is unclear if it influences the MCID. This study is the first to examine longitudinally the impact of the recall period of an anchor question and its design on the MCID of COPD health status tools using the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). METHODS: Moderate to very severe COPD patients without respiratory co-morbidities were recruited during 3-week Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR). CAT, CCQ and SGRQ were completed at baseline, discharge, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. A 15-point Global Rating of Change scale (GRC) was completed at each follow-up. A five-point GRC was used as second anchor at 12 months. Mean change scores of a subset of patients indicating a minimal improvement on each of the anchor questions were considered the MCID. The MCID estimates over different time periods were compared with one another by evaluating the degree of overlap of Confidence Intervals (CI) adjusted for dependency. RESULTS: In total 451 patients were included (57.9 ± 6.6 years, 65% male, 50/39/11% GOLD II/III/IV), of which 309 completed follow-up. Baseline health status scores were 20.2 ± 7.3 (CAT), 2.9 ± 1.2 (CCQ) and 50.7 ± 17.3 (SGRQ). MCID estimates for improvement ranged - 3.1 to - 1.4 for CAT, - 0.6 to - 0.3 for CCQ, and - 10.3 to - 7.6 for SGRQ. Absolute higher - though not significant - MCIDs were observed for CAT and CCQ directly after PR. Significantly absolute lower MCID estimates were observed for CAT (difference - 1.4: CI -2.3 to - 0.5) and CCQ (difference - 0.2: CI -0.3 to -0.1) using a five-point GRC. CONCLUSIONS: The recall period of a 15-point anchor question seemed to have limited impact on the MCID for improvement of CAT, CCQ and SGRQ during PR; although a 3-week MCID estimate directly after PR might lead to absolute higher values. However, the design of the anchor question was likely to influence the MCID of CAT and CCQ. TRIAL REGISTRATION: RIMTCORE trial # DRKS00004609 and #12107 (Ethik-Kommission der Bayerischen Landesärztekammer).

Forces that fracture teeth during extraction with mandibular premolar and maxillary incisor forceps.

Our aim was to measure the forces that fracture teeth during extraction based on the effectiveness of the extraction forceps, and to compare them with data collected about forces applied to extracted teeth that did not fracture. We studied 208 patients whose teeth fractured during both the standard and our new method of extraction: maxillary incisors (n=79) extracted with forceps 1 (maxillary incisor forceps), and both maxillary (n=95) and mandibular incisors (n=34) extracted with forceps 13 (mandibular premolar forceps). Forces needed to fracture were assessed with a specially-designed instrument for measuring pressure and rotation. Mean (SD) pressure at the fracture site was significantly higher in maxillary incisors extracted with forceps 1 (1.26 (0.26) bar) then in both maxillary and mandibular incisors extracted with forceps 13 (0.96 (0.19) and 0.98 (0.16), p<0.001). Pressure at dislocation and both left and right rotation showed similar patterns. Pressure correlated to root surfaces of teeth ranging from r=0.35-0.54 but the correlation coefficients did not differ significantly between the teeth-forceps groups. Pressure was higher in fractured than in extracted teeth, and this varied from 3%-48%. In conclusion, forces that break teeth during extractions are sometimes only slightly higher than the extraction forces, so caution is needed during extraction.

Periodontal conditions and oral hygiene in rural population of post-war Vukovar region, Croatia in correlation to stress.

OBJECTIVE: The greatest burden of oral diseases is on the socially marginalized population, such as those living in small villages and war areas. The aim of this study was to assess the periodontal conditions of people in post-war area villages in relation to oral hygiene, habits and war stress. METHODS: The study was conducted on a sample of 282 subjects (mean age 41.5 +/- 17.8) in seven Vukovar villages using the questionnaire and clinical periodontal examination. RESULTS: Five years after the war in Croatia the population was still very poor, low educated, and had a low level of periodontal health and oral hygiene habits. The level of periodontal disease and attachment loss tended to increase with age and physical activity and decrease with education level, higher frequency of tooth brushing and toothbrush replacement, dental visits and utilisation of auxiliary devices. Subjects exposed to any kind of war stress had a significantly worse periodontal status and more excluded sextants than those who were not exposed to such stress experience (p<0.05). Better periodontal conditions were found in individuals that were refugees, than those who were in war, wounded or lost a dear person (p<0.05). Individuals who were in war rarely brushed their teeth, visited dentist and changed toothbrushes, but more frequently drank alcohol and smoked, in comparison to other groups, especially those who have not been exposed to war stress. CONCLUSIONS: Specific socio-economic and psychological conditions in post-war areas could be significant risk factors for poor periodontal conditions.