AIM: The objective of the present prevalence analysis was to study the implications of Down's syndrome on oral health status among patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a descriptive and cross-sectional prevalence analysis conducted within a duration of 1 year. A total of 100 children diagnosed with Down syndrome (aged between 5 and 16 years) were selected as the study sample. Inclusion criteria were (a) cytogenetic positive trisomy 21, (b) cooperative behavior, and (c) written informed consent obtained from the legal care-takers. Exclusion criteria were (a) any debilitating form of systemic diseases, (b) any other disability, and (c) extremely uncooperative children. The gingival health status was assessed using gingival index (GI) [Loe and Silness], calculus index (CI) [Ramfjord], and plaque index (PI) [Silness and Loe]. Information involving the practice of oral hygiene maintenance, diet plans, and parental educational status was derived from each parent. Based upon their intelligence quotient (I. Q.) values, the subjects were classified into three groups: a) mild (I. Q. level = 50 to 70), b) moderate (I. Q. level = 35 to 50), and c) severe (I. Q. level ≤35). Statistical analysis was performed using the statistical software tool Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0. Qualitative data were recorded as frequencies, and percentages and quantitative data were recorded as mean and standard deviation values. All categorical outcomes were analyzed by means of the Chi-square test. The quantitative outcomes of Calculus Index, Gingival Index, and Plaque Index were analyzed by either student's t-test or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Significance was set at a cut-off value of P < 0.05.
RESULTS: Down syndromic children between 12 and 16 years were reported to have statistically significant higher Calculus Index, Gingival Index, and Plaque Index values in comparison with younger age syndromic children (P < 0.01). Those with severe mental retardation had significantly higher Plaque Index (P < 0.001) and Gingival Index (P < 0.04) values when compared with those with mild and moderate mental retardation. No significant difference in comparing Calculus Index was noted.
CONCLUSION: Higher age group children with Down syndrome require close monitoring by parents for assisting in maintaining oral hygiene practices just as in younger age group children.
DESIGN: A post hoc subgroup analysis of the effect of higher protein dosing in critically ill patients with high nutritional risk (EFFORT Protein): an international, multicenter, pragmatic, registry-based randomized trial.
SETTING: Eighty-five adult ICUs across 16 countries.
PATIENTS: Patients with obesity defined as a body mass index (BMI) greater than or equal to 30 kg/m 2 ( n = 425).
INTERVENTIONS: In the primary study, patients were randomized into a high-dose (≥ 2.2 g/kg/d) or usual-dose protein group (≤ 1.2 g/kg/d).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Protein intake was monitored for up to 28 days, and outcomes (time to discharge alive [TTDA], 60-d mortality, days of mechanical ventilation [MV], hospital, and ICU length of stay [LOS]) were recorded until 60 days post-randomization. Of the 1301 patients in the primary study, 425 had a BMI greater than or equal to 30 kg/m 2 . After adjusting for sites and covariates, we observed a nonsignificant slower rate of TTDA with higher protein that ruled out a clinically important benefit (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-1.05; p = 0.10). We found no evidence of difference in TTDA between protein groups when subgroups with different classes of obesity or patients with and without various nutritional and frailty risk variables were examined, even after the removal of patients with baseline acute kidney injury. Overall, 60-day mortality rates were 31.5% and 28.2% in the high protein and usual protein groups, respectively (risk difference, 3.3%; 95% CI, -5.4 to 12.1; p = 0.46). Duration of MV and LOS in hospital and ICU were not significantly different between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with obesity, higher protein doses did not improve clinical outcomes, including those with higher nutritional and frailty risk.
Result: The Hyflex EDM (774.29) exhibited the maximum cyclic fatigue resistance compared to Twisted files (654.875) and ProTaper Gold (375.575). A statistically significant difference was observed between the tested groups.
Conclusion: The Hyflex EDM files showed the highest cyclic fatigue resistance, followed by Twisted files and ProTaper Gold files.
METHOD: To overcome the limitation, the use of artificial intelligence along with technical tools has been extensively investigated for AD diagnosis. For developing a promising artificial intelligence strategy that can diagnose AD early, it is critical to supervise neuropsychological outcomes and imaging-based readouts with a proper clinical review.
CONCLUSION: Profound knowledge, a large data pool, and detailed investigations are required for the successful implementation of this tool. This review will enlighten various aspects of early diagnosis of AD using artificial intelligence.
AIMS: To characterize variability of rtPA price, its availability, and its association with and impact on each country's health expenditure (HE) resources.
METHODS: We conducted a global survey to obtain information on rtPA price (50 mg vial, 2020 US Dollars) and availability. Country-specific data, including low, lower middle (LMIC), upper middle (UMIC), and high-income country (HIC) classifications, and gross domestic product (GDP) and HE, both nominally and adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP), were obtained from World Bank Open Data. To assess the impact of rtPA cost, we computed the rtPA price as percentage of per capita GDP and HE and examined its association with the country income classification.
RESULTS: rtPA is approved and available in 109 countries. We received surveys from 59 countries: 27 (46%) HIC, 20 (34%) UMIC, and 12 (20%) LMIC. Although HIC have significantly higher per capita GDP and HE compared to UMIC and LMIC (p < 0.0001), the median price of rtPA is non-significantly higher in LMICs (USD 755, interquartile range, IQR (575-1300)) compared to UMICs (USD 544, IQR (400-815)) and HICs (USD 600, IQR (526-1000)). In LMIC, rtPA cost accounts for 217.4% (IQR, 27.1-340.6%) of PPP-adjusted per capita HE, compared to 17.6% (IQR (11.2-28.7%), p < 0.0001) for HICs.
CONCLUSION: We documented significant variability in rtPA availability and price among countries. Relative costs are higher in lower income countries, exceeding the available HE. Concerted efforts to improve rtPA affordability in low-income settings are necessary.