Risk factors for death of patients with cystic fibrosis awaiting lung transplantation.

RATIONALE: The optimal timing for listing of cystic fibrosis patients for lung transplantation is controversial. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 343 patients listed for lung transplantation at four academic medical centers to identify risk factors for death while awaiting transplantation. METHODS: Data on possible risk factors were abstracted from medical records. MEASUREMENTS: Time to death, patient demographic characteristics, and risk factors for death while awaiting transplantation were assessed. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were performed using Cox regression. RESULTS: By univariate analyses, FEV1 < or = 30% predicted (HR, 3.8; 95% CI, 2.0-7.5), Pa(CO2) > or = 50 mm Hg (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0), and shorter height (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0) were associated with a higher risk of death. Referral from an accredited cystic fibrosis center was associated with a lower risk (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30-0.92). The final multivariate model included referral from an accredited cystic fibrosis center (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-1.0) and listing year after 1996 (HR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7); both were associated with a lower risk of death. FEV1 < or = 30% predicted (HR, 6.8; 95% CI, 2.4-19.3), Pa(CO2) > or = 50 mm Hg (HR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.5-32.1), and use of a nutritional intervention (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.3-4.1) were associated with increased risk. Patients with FEV1 > 30% predicted had a higher risk of death only when their Pa(CO2) was > or = 50 mm Hg (HR, 7.0; 95% CI, 1.5-32), while the increased risk of death with FEV1 < or = 30% was not further influenced by the presence of hypercapnia. CONCLUSIONS: We identified risk factors for waiting list mortality that could impact on transplant listing and allocation guidelines.

Preventive dental care and unmet dental needs among low-income children.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the ways in which levels of preventive dental care and unmet dental needs varied among subgroups of low-income children. METHODS: Data were drawn from the 2002 National Survey of America's Families. We conducted bivariate and multivariate analyses, including logistic regression analyses, to assess relationships between socioeconomic, demographic, and health factors and receipt of preventive dental care and unmet dental needs. RESULTS: More than half of low-income children without health insurance had no preventive dental care visits. Levels of unmet dental needs among low-income children who had private health insurance coverage but no dental benefits were similar to those among uninsured children. Children of parents whose mental health was rated as poor were twice as likely to have unmet dental needs as other children. CONCLUSIONS: Additional progress toward improving the dental health of low-income children depends on identifying and responding to factors limiting both the demand for and the supply of dental services. In particular, it appears that expanding access to dental benefits is key to improving the oral health of this population.