[Oral and maxillofacial surgery in The Netherlands: from Esser until today]

Contains fulltext : 53404.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)In 2006, it was 50 years ago that the oral and maxillofacial surgery was officially recognized as a dental speciality in The Netherlands. During those five decades, oral and maxillofacial surgery significantly evolved, which is nicely reflected by the changes in the name of the scientific society supporting the speciality. Originally its name was The Netherlands Society for Oral Surgery and Surgical Prosthodontics, but in 1975 its name was changed into The Netherlands Society for Oral Medicine and Oral Surgery, and in 2006 into The Netherlands Society for Oral Medicine and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Esser is considered to be the first oral and maxillofacial surgeon in The Netherlands. In The Netherlands, 2 schools of oral and maxillofacial surgery are recognized: the Utrecht School with Tjebbes as its founder and the Groningen School with Hut as its founder. Because of the 50th anniversary of the speciality, a thematic issue of the Dutch Journal of Dentistry offers a review of the current status of and expected future developments in oral medicine, head and neck oncology, maxillofacial traumatology, growth and development disorders of the maxillofacial skeleton, temporomandibular joint disorders and reconstructive surgery in The Netherlands

Heritable connective tissue disorders in childhood : increased fatigue, pain, disability and decreased general health

Heritable Connective Tissue Disorders (HCTD) show an overlap in the physical features that can evolve in childhood. It is unclear to what extent children with HCTD experience burden of disease. This study aims to quantify fatigue, pain, disability and general health with standardized validated questionnaires. Methods. This observational, multicenter study included 107 children, aged 4-18 years, with Marfan syndrome (MFS), 58%; Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS), 7%; Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (EDS), 8%; and hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS), 27%. The assessments included PROMIS Fatigue Parent-Proxy and Pediatric self-report, pain and general health Visual-Analogue-Scales (VAS) and a Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ). Results. Compared to normative data, the total HCTD-group showed significantly higher parent-rated fatigue T-scores (M = 53 (SD = 12), p = 0.004, d = 0.3), pain VAS scores (M = 2.8 (SD = 3.1), p < 0.001, d = 1.27), general health VAS scores (M = 2.5 (SD = 1.8), p < 0.001, d = 2.04) and CHAQ disability index scores (M = 0.9 (SD = 0.7), p < 0.001, d = 1.23). HCTD-subgroups showed similar results. The most adverse sequels were reported in children with hEDS, whereas the least were reported in those with MFS. Disability showed significant relationships with fatigue (p < 0.001, r(s) = 0.68), pain (p < 0.001, r(s) = 0.64) and general health (p < 0.001, r(s) = 0.59). Conclusions. Compared to normative data, children and adolescents with HCTD reported increased fatigue, pain, disability and decreased general health, with most differences translating into very large-sized effects. This new knowledge calls for systematic monitoring with standardized validated questionnaires, physical assessments and tailored interventions in clinical care