Oral health status and need for oral care of care-dependent indwelling elderly:from admission to death

Objectives: The objective of this study is to assess oral health and oral status of elderly patients newly admitted to a nursing home from admission until death. Materials and methods: Oral health, oral status, need for dental care, cooperation with dental treatment, and given dental care were assessed by two geriatric dentists in all new long-stay patients (n = 725) admitted to a nursing home between January 2009 and December 2013. All patients were followed from admission until death or until they left the nursing home. Results: At admission, dementia patients were significantly older than somatic patients; median [IQR] ages were, respectively, 85 [79–89] and 81 [76–87] (p = 0.001). In addition, edentulous patients were significantly older than patients with remaining teeth, 83 [79–89] versus 80 [74–86] (p = 0.001) years. Thirty percent of the admitted patients died within 12 months after admission. A small minority (20%) of the patients had their own teeth. In this group, poor oral hygiene (72%), caries (70%), and broken teeth (62%) were frequently observed. Edentulous patients were significantly more cooperative with treatment than patients with remaining teeth (64 versus 27%). Finally, significantly less professional dental care was given to edentulous patients when compared to patients with remaining teeth (median 90 [IQR 60–180] versus 165 [75–375] min). Conclusion: When compared to edentulous elderly patients, patients with remaining teeth were younger at admittance, were more often non-cooperative, and had a poorer oral health and higher need for dental care. Clinical relevance: It is important that health care workers ensure adequate oral health and dental care to frail elderly, especially for elderly with remaining teeth

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Decision Tool Anxiety Disorders, OCD and PTSD (DTAOP):Facilitating the early detection of patients in need of highly specialized care

Background: Early identification of patients with an anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in need of highly specialized care could facilitate the selection of the optimal initial treatment in these patients. This paper describes the development and psychometric evaluation of the Decision Tool Anxiety Disorders, OCD and PTSD (DTAOP), which aims to aid clinicians in the early identification of patients with an anxiety disorder, OCD, or PTSD in need of highly specialized mental healthcare. Methods: A systematic literature review and a concept mapping procedure were carried out to inform the development of the DTAOP. To evaluate the psychometric properties of the DTAOP, a cross-sectional study in 454 patients with a DSM-IV-TR anxiety disorder was carried out. Feasibility was evaluated by the completion time and the content clarity of the DTAOP. Inter-rater reliability was assessed in a subsample of 87 patients. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients between the DTAOP and EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) scores were computed to examine the convergent validity. Criterion validity was assessed against independent clinical judgments made by clinicians. Results: The average time required to complete the eight-item DTAOP was 4.6 min and the total DTAOP was evaluated as clear in the majority (93%) of the evaluations. Krippendorff’s alpha estimates ranged from 0.427 to 0.839. Based on the qualitative feedback, item wording and instructions were improved. As hypothesized, the DTAOP correlated negatively with EQ-5D-5L scores. The area under the curve was 0.826 and the cut-off score of >= 4 optimized sensitivity (70%) and specificity (71%). Conclusions: The DTAOP demonstrated excellent feasibility and good validity, but weak inter-rater reliability. Based on the qualitative feedback and reliability estimates, revisions and refinements of the wording and instructions were made, resulting in the final version of the DTAOP

Reduced Vitamin K Status as a Potentially Modifiable Risk Factor of Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019

BACKGROUND: Respiratory failure and thromboembolism are frequent in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. Vitamin K activates both hepatic coagulation factors and extrahepatic endothelial anticoagulant protein S, required for thrombosis prevention. In times of vitamin K insufficiency, hepatic procoagulant factors are preferentially activated over extrahepatic proteins. Vitamin K also activates matrix Gla protein (MGP), which protects against pulmonary and vascular elastic fiber damage. We hypothesized that vitamin K may be implicated in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), linking pulmonary and thromboembolic disease. METHODS: 135 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were compared with 184 historical controls. Poor outcome was defined as invasive ventilation and/or death. Inactive vitamin K-dependent MGP (dp-ucMGP) and prothrombin (PIVKA-II) were measured, inversely related to extrahepatic and hepatic vitamin K status, respectively. Desmosine was measured to quantify the rate of elastic fiber degradation. Arterial calcification severity was assessed by computed tomography. RESULTS: Dp-ucMGP was elevated in COVID-19 patients compared to controls (p<0.001), with even higher dp-ucMGP in patients with poor outcomes (p<0.001). PIVKA-II was normal in 82.1% of patients. Dp-ucMGP was correlated with desmosine (p<0.001), and coronary artery (p=0.002) and thoracic aortic (p<0.001) calcification scores. CONCLUSIONS: Dp-ucMGP was severely increased in COVID-19 patients, indicating extrahepatic vitamin K insufficiency, which was related to poor outcome while hepatic procoagulant factor II remained unaffected. These data suggest a mechanism of pneumonia-induced extrahepatic vitamin K depletion leading to accelerated elastic fiber damage and thrombosis in severe COVID-19 due to impaired activation of MGP and endothelial protein S, respectively. A clinical trial could assess whether vitamin K administration improves COVID-19 outcomes

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Mandibular fracture caused by peri-implant bone loss: Report of a case

Background: A major complication related to excessive bone loss around implants is fracture of the mandible. This complication is most likely to occur in a very atrophic mandible. A 57-year-old woman presented with progressive pain and swelling that had been present for 5 days in the right frontal region of the mandible. An intraoral radiograph revealed a radiolucency around one of the implants in the interforaminal region. Methods: Ten years earlier, 4 hollow-screw implants of 10 mm length had been inserted in the interforaminal region of the edentulous mandible. Throughout the 10-year postoperative period, no adverse clinical events were seen; however, during the last 7 years, no radiographic follow-up was performed. Mobility was tested after removal of the bar, on which one of the implants appeared to be mobile. The mobile implant was removed together with the flbrous tissue. Results: At a recall visit 2 weeks later, a radiograph revealed a fracture of the mandible at the explantation site. Characteristic features of the hollow-screw implant are the hollow body and the transverse openings in the side walls of the implant. It has been reported that these characteristic features can enhance infection and rapid bone loss, but a case of mandibular fracture has never been described. Conclusion: Radiographs should be taken on a regular and perhaps more frequent basis to diagnose excessive bone loss, so that measures can be taken to prevent the risk of mandibular fracture