In vitro activities of natural products against oral Candida isolates from denture wearers

Background: Candida-associated denture stomatitis is a frequent infectious disease. Treatment of this oral condition is difficult because failures and recurrences are common. The aim of this study was to test the in vitro antifungal activity of pure constituents of essentials oils. -- Methods: Eight terpenic derivatives (carvacrol, farnesol, geraniol, linalool, menthol, menthone, terpinen-4-ol, and aterpineol), a phenylpropanoid (eugenol), a phenethyl alcohol (tyrosol) and fluconazole were evaluated against 38 Candida isolated from denture-wearers and 10 collection Candida strains by the CLSI M27-A3 broth microdilution method. -- Results: Almost all the tested compounds showed antifungal activity with MIC ranges of 0.03-0.25% for eugenol and linalool, 0.03-0.12% for geraniol, 0.06-0.5% for menthol, a-terpineol and terpinen-4-ol, 0.03-0.5% for carvacrol, and 0.06-4% for menthone. These compounds, with the exception of farnesol, menthone and tyrosol, showed important in vitro activities against the fluconazole-resistant and susceptible-dose dependent Candida isolates. -- Conclusions: Carvacrol, eugenol, geraniol, linalool and terpinen-4-ol were very active in vitro against oral Candida isolates. Their fungistatic and fungicidal activities might convert them into promising alternatives for the topic treatment of oral candidiasis and denture stomatitis.

The IRYSS-COPD appropriateness study: objectives, methodology, and description of the prospective cohort

Background: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often experience exacerbations of the disease that require hospitalization. Current guidelines offer little guidance for identifying patients whose clinical situation is appropriate for admission to the hospital, and properly developed and validated severity scores for COPD exacerbations are lacking. To address these important gaps in clinical care, we created the IRYSS-COPD Appropriateness Study. Methods/Design: The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Methodology was used to identify appropriate and inappropriate scenarios for hospital admission for patients experiencing COPD exacerbations. These scenarios were then applied to a prospective cohort of patients attending the emergency departments (ED) of 16 participating hospitals. Information was recorded during the time the patient was evaluated in the ED, at the time a decision was made to admit the patient to the hospital or discharge home, and during follow-up after admission or discharge home. While complete data were generally available at the time of ED admission, data were often missing at the time of decision making. Predefined assumptions were used to impute much of the missing data. Discussion: The IRYSS-COPD Appropriateness Study will validate the appropriateness criteria developed by the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Methodology and thus better delineate the requirements for admission or discharge of patients experiencing exacerbations of COPD. The study will also provide a better understanding of the determinants of outcomes of COPD exacerbations, and evaluate the equity and variability in access and outcomes in these patients.

Development of appropriateness explicit criteria for cataract extraction by phacoemulsification

Background: Consensus development techniques were used in the late 1980s to create explicit criteria for the appropriateness of cataract extraction. We developed a new appropriateness of indications tool for cataract following the RAND method. We tested the validity of our panel results. Methods: Criteria were developed using a modified Delphi panel judgment process. A panel of 12 ophthalmologists was assembled. Ratings were analyzed regarding the level of agreement among panelists. We studied the influence of all variables on the final panel score using linear and logistic regression models. The explicit criteria developed were summarized by classification and regression tree analysis. Results: Of the 765 indications evaluated by the main panel in the second round, 32.9% were found appropriate, 30.1% uncertain, and 37% inappropriate. Agreement was found in 53% of the indications and disagreement in 0.9%. Seven variables were considered to create the indications and divided into three groups: simple cataract, with diabetic retinopathy, or with other ocular pathologies. The preoperative visual acuity in the cataractous eye and visual function were the variables that best explained the panel scoring. The panel results were synthesized and presented in three decision trees. Misclassification error in the decision trees, as compared with the panel original criteria, was 5.3%. Conclusion: The parameters tested showed acceptable validity for an evaluation tool. These results support the use of this indication algorithm as a screening tool for assessing the appropriateness of cataract extraction in field studies and for the development of practice guidelines.

Los centros de apoyo a la formación e innovación del sistema educativo en la Comunidad Autónoma Vasca (Berritzegune). Análisis de los puestos de trabajo desde el punto de vista de sus profesionales

III,455 p.