The use of atraumatic restorative treatment in elderly patients: a randomised controlled clinical trial

Objectives: to assess elderly patients’ dental status and dental habits and compare the survival rates, impact on patients’ quality of life and cost-effectiveness of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) and a conventional treatment (CT) to restore carious lesions in an elderly population. Methods: In this randomised clinical trial, 99 independently living adults (65-90 yrs) with carious lesions were randomly allocated to receive either ART or CT. Details of restored, missing and carious teeth were recorded and patients answered some questions about their oral hygiene and dental attendance habits. Direct and indirect costs were measured based on treatment time, materials and labour. Effectiveness was measured using restoration survival percentage after one year. The survival of restorations was assessed 6 months and one year after restoration placement by an independent examiner. Oralhealth related quality of life (OHRQoL) was assessed using the OHIP-14 at baseline and 2 months after treatment together with a global transition statement. Results: The patient sample comprised 46 (46.46%) male and 53 (53.54) female participants at baseline, with a mean age of 73.18 (SD=6.76). The mean DMFT of the entire sample was 27.10. Ninety patients and 268 restorations could be assessed after one year, 127 ART (46 patients) and 141 conventional restorations (44 patients). 93.7% and 97.2% of the restorations placed were considered successful in the ART and CT groups, respectively. The OHIP scores did not change dramatically 2 months after treatment, in either group. The global transition scale showed an improvement in overall oral health after treatment for the majority of patients. The ART were more cost-effective compared to the CT restorations. Conclusions: ART presented survival rates similar to CT after 1 year and was a more cost-effective alternative to treat the elderly.

Antimicrobial stewardship in Ireland, with a focus on long term care facilities

Background: Antimicrobial resistance is a major public health concern, and its increasing incidence in the Long Term Care Facility (LTCF) setting warrants attention (1). The prescribing of antimicrobials in this setting is often inappropriate and higher in Ireland than the European average (2). The aim of the study was to generate an evidence base for the factors influencing antimicrobial prescribing in LTCFs and to investigate Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) strategies for LTCFs. Methods: An initial qualitative study was conducted to determine the factors influencing antimicrobial prescribing in Irish LTCFs. This allowed for the informed implementation of an AMS feasibility study in LTCFs in the greater Cork region. Hospital AMS was also investigated by means of a national survey. A study of LTCF urine sample antimicrobial resistance rates was conducted in order to collate information for incorporation into future LTCF AMS initiatives. Results: The qualitative interviews determined that there are a multitude of factors, unique to the LTCF setting, which influence antimicrobial prescribing. There was a positive response from the doctors and nurses involved in the feasibility study as they welcomed the opportunity to engage with AMS and audit and feedback activities. While the results did not indicate a significant change in antimicrobial prescribing over the study period, important trends and patterns of use were detected. The antimicrobial susceptibility of LTCF urine samples compared to GPs samples found that there was a higher level of antimicrobial resistance in LTCFs. Conclusion: This study has made an important contribution to the development of AMS in LTCFs. The complexity of care and healthcare organisation, and the factors unique to LTCFs must be borne in mind when developing quality improvement strategies.