MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients with one dry socket each, at University Dental Hospital Sharjah, were divided into three treatment groups based on their choice. In group I (n = 30), conventional treatment comprising of gentle socket curettage and saline irrigation was done. Group II (n = 15) dry sockets were treated with CGF and group III (n = 15) sockets were lased with LLLT. All dry socket patients were seen at day 0 for treatment and subsequently followed-up at 4, 7, 14, and 21 days. Pain score, perisocket inflammation, perisocket tenderness, and amount of granulation tissue formation were noted.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data were analyzed as mean values for each treatment group. Comparisons were made for statistical analysis within the group and among the three groups to rank the efficacy of treatment using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Statistically significant difference is kept at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Conventional treatment group I took more than 7 days to match the healing phase of group II CGF treated socket and group III LLLT irradiated socket (p = 0.001). When healing rate between CGF and LLLT are compared, LLLT group III showed a delay of 4 days compared with CGF in granulation tissue formation and pain control.
CONCLUSION: CGF treated socket was superior to LLLT in its ability to generate 75% granulation tissue and eliminate pain symptom by day 7 (p = 0.001).
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of postpartum dyspareunia.
SEARCH STRATEGY: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched to July 2019 using keywords including 'perineal pain,' 'dyspareunia,' and 'sexual pain'.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Observational studies on the prevalence of postpartum dyspareunia were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed articles and extracted data. Study heterogeneity was evaluated by I2 index; publication bias by Egger and Begg tests.
MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two studies enrolling 11 457 women were included. Based on meta-analysis, the overall estimated prevalence of dyspareunia was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29%-41%). The prevalence was 42% (95% CI, 26%-60%) at 2 months, 43% (95% CI, 36%-50%) at 2-6 months, and 22% (95% CI, 15%-29%) at 6-12 months postpartum. Begg test showed no significant bias in data related to the prevalence of postpartum dyspareunia (p = 0.466).
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of postpartum dyspareunia was 35% and decreased with increasing postpartum duration. Given the high prevalence and its impact on a woman's quality of life, special attention should be paid to this common complaint during the postpartum period.
METHODS: A modified Delphi study was used. A total of 70 statements were presented, using an online platform, over three consensus-seeking rounds, to participants with experience in the hospital care of patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures from UK-based specialist societies. Participants rated the level of their agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined at 70% of respondents choosing either agree/strongly agree or disagree/strong disagree. Over the first two rounds, statements not reaching consensus were modified in subsequent rounds, and new statements proposed by participants and agreed by the research team could be added.
RESULTS: There were 71 participants in the first round, 37 in the second round and 28 (most of whom were geriatricians) in the third round. Consensus was reached in 52 statements covering fracture diagnosis, second-line imaging, organisation of hospital care, pain management and falls and bone health assessment. Consensus was not achieved for whether vertebral fragility fractures should be managed in a specific clinical area.
DISCUSSION: These findings provide the basis for the development of clinical guidelines and quality improvement initiatives. They also help to justify research into the merits of managing acute vertebral fragility fracture patients in a specific clinical area.
METHODOLOGY: A preliminary cross-sectional survey in which three urban schools and three rural schools were selected randomly. Two classes were selected randomly from each year. A questionnaire was given to each child asking him or her about whether they had experienced abdominal pain occurring at least three times over a period of at least 3 months, interfering with normal daily activity. 1 Interfering with normal daily activity was defined as missing school and/or having to stop doing a routine daily activity on account of the pain. Girls whose pains were related to periods were excluded. After the forms had been completed, each child was again interviewed to ensure that Apley's criteria1 was fulfilled in cases of RAP.
RESULTS: The overall prevalence of RAP among 1549 schoolchildren (764 boys; 785 girls) was 10.2% (95% confidence interval (CI), 8.8-11.8). There appeared to be a higher prevalence in rural schoolchildren (P = 0.008; odds ratio (OR) 1.58), in those with a lower family income (P < 0.001; OR 2.02) and in children whose fathers have a lower educational attainment (P = 0.002; OR 1. 92). There were no significant differences in the prevalence of RAP among children of different sex, age, ethnic group and family size.
CONCLUSION: : In spite of differences in time and culture, the overall prevalence of 10.2% found in this study is similar to that determined by Apley.1 There are significant differences in the prevalence of RAP between children from rural and urban schools, among children with different family incomes and among children whose parents have different educational backgrounds.