Psychological risk indicators for peri-implantitis:a cross-sectional study

AIM: The aim of this analytical cross-sectional study was to evaluate the association between peri-implantitis and psychological distress, and potentially related/mediating factors such as general health, bruxism and lifestyle factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients having received dental implants at a private practice in the Netherlands between January 2011 and January 2014 were recalled on a 5-year clinical and radiographic follow-up examination. Presence of peri-implantitis was examined and patients completed questionnaires measuring psychological distress (Symptom Checklist-90), bruxism, general health and lifestyle factors. Associations between the self-reported factors and peri-implantitis were analyzed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 230 patients (with 347 implants) were included in the analysis. Prevalence of (mild to severe) peri-implantitis was 30% (69 patients). Variables that showed a significant univariable association with peri-implantitis (p<0.10) were: SCL-90 subdomain depression, smoking, current medical treatment and lung problems. In the multivariable regression analysis, only the variable depression was significantly associated with peri-implantitis (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of depressive symptoms is a risk indicator for peri-implantitis. Recognizing the potential negative impact of depressive symptoms may allow for better identification of high risk patients

Pain characteristics of older persons with medically unexplained symptoms, older persons with medically explained symptoms and older persons with depression

Objectives: The main objective of the current study is to compare chronic pain characteristics of older patients with Medically Unexplained Symptoms (MUS), to those of patients with Medically Explained Symptoms (MES), and to those of patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). Method: By combining data from the OPUS and NESDO study, we compared pain characteristics of 102 older (&gt;60 years) MUS-patients to 145 older MES-patients and 275 older MDD-patients in a case-control study design. Group differences were analyzed using ANCOVA, adjusted for demographic and physical characteristics. Linear regression was applied to examine the association between pain characteristics and somatization (BSI-53 somatization scale) and health anxiety (Whitely Index). Results: Older MUS-patients have approximately two times more chance of having chronic pain when compared to older MES-patients (OR = 2.01; p = .013) but equal chances as opposed to MDD-patients. After adjustments, MUS-patients report higher pain intensity and disability scores and more pain locations when compared to MES-patients, but equal values as MDD-patients. Health anxiety and somatization levels were positively associated with the number of pain sites in MUS-patients, but not with pain severity or disability. Conclusion: Older MUS-patients did not differ from MDD-patients with respect to any of the chronic pain characteristics, but had more intense and disabling pain, and more pain locations when compared to older MES-patients.</p

ICARES: a real-time automated detection tool for clusters of infectious diseases in the Netherlands.

Clusters of infectious diseases are frequently detected late. Real-time, detailed information about an evolving cluster and possible associated conditions is essential for local policy makers, travelers planning to visit the area, and the local population. This is currently illustrated in the Zika virus outbreak

Pain management in patients with dementia

There are an estimated 35 million people with dementia across the world, of whom 50% experience regular pain. Despite this, current assessment and treatment of pain in this patient group are inadequate. In addition to the discomfort and distress caused by pain, it is frequently the underlying cause of behavioral symptoms, which can lead to inappropriate treatment with antipsychotic medications. Pain also contributes to further complications in treatment and care. This review explores four key perspectives of pain management in dementia and makes recommendations for practice and research. The first perspective discussed is the considerable uncertainty within the literature on the impact of dementia neuropathology on pain perception and processing in Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, where white matter lesions and brain atrophy appear to influence the neurobiology of pain. The second perspective considers the assessment of pain in dementia. This is challenging, particularly because of the limited capacity of self-report by these individuals, which means that assessment relies in large part on observational methods. A number of tools are available but the psychometric quality and clinical utility of these are uncertain. The evidence for efficient treatment (the third perspective) with analgesics is also limited, with few statistically well-powered trials. The most promising evidence supports the use of stepped treatment approaches, and indicates the benefit of pain and behavioral interventions on both these important symptoms. The fourth perspective debates further difficulties in pain management due to the lack of sufficient training and education for health care professionals at all levels, where evidence-based guidance is urgently needed. To address the current inadequate management of pain in dementia, a comprehensive approach is needed. This would include an accurate, validated assessment tool that is sensitive to different types of pain and therapeutic effects, supported by better training and support for care staff across all settings

Pain management in patients with dementia

There are an estimated 35 million people with dementia across the world, of whom 50% experience regular pain. Despite this, current assessment and treatment of pain in this patient group are inadequate. In addition to the discomfort and distress caused by pain, it is frequently the underlying cause of behavioral symptoms, which can lead to inappropriate treatment with antipsychotic medications. Pain also contributes to further complications in treatment and care. This review explores four key perspectives of pain management in dementia and makes recommendations for practice and research. The first perspective discussed is the considerable uncertainty within the literature on the impact of dementia neuropathology on pain perception and processing in Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, where white matter lesions and brain atrophy appear to influence the neurobiology of pain. The second perspective considers the assessment of pain in dementia. This is challenging, particularly because of the limited capacity of self-report by these individuals, which means that assessment relies in large part on observational methods. A number of tools are available but the psychometric quality and clinical utility of these are uncertain. The evidence for efficient treatment (the third perspective) with analgesics is also limited, with few statistically well-powered trials. The most promising evidence supports the use of stepped treatment approaches, and indicates the benefit of pain and behavioral interventions on both these important symptoms. The fourth perspective debates further difficulties in pain management due to the lack of sufficient training and education for health care professionals at all levels, where evidence-based guidance is urgently needed. To address the current inadequate management of pain in dementia, a comprehensive approach is needed. This would include an accurate, validated assessment tool that is sensitive to different types of pain and therapeutic effects, supported by better training and support for care staff across all settings.publishedVersio

Distancing Measures and Challenges Discussed by COVID-19 Outbreak Teams of Dutch Nursing Homes:The COVID-19 MINUTES Study

The most severe COVID-19 infections and highest mortality rates are seen among long-term care residents. To reduce the risk of infection, physical distancing is important. This study investigates what physical distancing measures were discussed by COVID-19 outbreak teams of Dutch long-term care organizations and what challenges they encountered. The COVID-19 MINUTES study is a qualitative multi-center study (n = 41) that collected minutes of COVID-19 outbreak teams from March 2020 to October 2021. Textual units about distancing measures were selected and analyzed using manifest content analysis for the first wave: early March-early May 2020; the intermediate period of 2020: mid-May-mid-September 2020; and the second wave: late September 2020-mid-June 2021. During all periods, COVID-19 outbreak teams often discussed distancing visitors from residents. Moreover, during the first wave they often discussed isolation measures, during the intermediate period they often discussed distancing staff and volunteers from residents, and during both the intermediate period and the second wave they often discussed distancing among residents. During all periods, less often admission measures were discussed. Challenges persisted and included unrest among and conflicts between visitors and staff, visitors violating measures, resident non-adherence to measures, and staffing issues. The discussed distancing measures and corresponding challenges may guide local long-term care and (inter)national policymakers during the further course of the COVID-19 pandemic, outbreaks of other infectious diseases, and long-term care innovations

COVID-19 management in nursing homes by outbreak teams (MINUTES)-study description and data characteristics:A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES: Nursing homes are hit relatively hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. Dutch long-term care (LTC) organisations installed outbreak teams (OTs) to coordinate COVID-19 infection prevention and control. LTC organisations and relevant national policy organisations expressed the need to share experiences from these OTs that can be applied directly in COVID-19 policy. The aim of the ‘COVID-19 management in nursing homes by outbreak teams’ (MINUTES) study is to describe the challenges, responses and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in Dutch nursing homes. In this first article, we describe the MINUTES Study and present data characteristics. DESIGN: This large-scale multicentre study has a qualitative design using manifest content analysis. The participating organisations shared their OT minutes and other meeting documents on a weekly basis. Data from week 16 (April) to week 53 (December) 2020 included the first two waves of COVID-19. SETTING: National study with 41 large Dutch LTC organisations. PARTICIPANTS: The LTC organisations represented 563 nursing home locations and almost 43 000 residents. RESULTS: At least 36 of the 41 organisations had one or more SARS-CoV-2 infections among their residents. Most OTs were composed of management, medical staff, support services staff, policy advisors and communication specialists. Topics that emerged from the documents were: crisis management, isolation of residents, personal protective equipment and hygiene, staff, residents’ well-being, visitor policies, testing and vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: OT meeting minutes are a valuable data source to monitor the impact of and responses to COVID-19 in nursing homes. Depending on the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, data collection and analysis will continue until November 2021. The results are used directly in national and organisational COVID-19 policy

Observational pain assessment in older persons with dementia in four countries:observer agreement of items and factor structure of the Pain Assessment in Impaired Cognition

Background: Recognition of pain in people with dementia is challenging. Observational scales have been developed, but there is a need to harmonize and improve the assessment process. In EU initiative COST-Action TD1005, 36 promising items were selected from existing scales to be tested further. We aimed to study the observer agreement of each item, and to analyse the factor structure of the complete set. Methods: One hundred and ninety older persons with dementia were recruited in four different countries (Italy, Serbia, Spain and The Netherlands) from different types of healthcare facilities. Patients represented a convenience sample, with no pre-selection on presence of (suspected) pain. The Pain Assessment in Impaired Cognition (PAIC, research version) item pool includes facial expressions of pain (15 items), body movements (10 items) and vocalizations (11 items). Participants were observed by health professionals in two situations, at rest and during movement. Intrarater and interrater reliability was analysed by percentage agreement. The factor structure was examined with principal component analysis with orthogonal rotation. Results: Health professionals performed observations in 40–57 patients in each country. Intrarater and interrater agreement was generally high (≥70%). However, for some facial expression items, agreement was sometimes below 70%. Factor analyses showed a six-component solution, which were named as follows: Vocal pain expression, Face anatomical descriptors, Protective body movements, Vocal defence, Tension and Lack of affect. Conclusions: Observation of PAIC items can be done reliably in healthcare settings. Observer agreement is quite promising already without extensive training. Significance: In this international project, promising items from existing observational pain scales were identified and evaluated regarding their reliability as an alternative to pain self-report in people with dementia. Analysis on factor structure helped to understand the character of the items. Health professionals from four countries using four different European languages were able to rate items reliably. The results contributed to an informed reduction of items for a clinical observer scale (Pain Assessment in Impaired Cognition scale with 15 items: PAIC15)