Periodontitis and systemic diseases:A record of discussions of working group 4 of the Joint EFP/AAP Workshop on Periodontitis and Systemic Diseases

Background There has been an explosion in research into possible associations between periodontitis and various systemic diseases and conditions. Aim To review the evidence for associations between periodontitis and various systemic diseases and conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), pneumonia, chronic kidney disease, rheumatoid arthritis, cognitive impairment, obesity, metabolic syndrome and cancer, and to document headline discussions of the state of each field. Periodontal associations with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and adverse pregnancy outcomes were not discussed by working group 4. Results Working group 4 recognized that the studies performed to date were largely cross-sectional or case-control with few prospective cohort studies and no randomized clinical trials. The best current evidence suggests that periodontitis is characterized by both infection and pro-inflammatory events, which variously manifest within the systemic diseases and disorders discussed. Diseases with at least minimal evidence of an association with periodontitis include COPD, pneumonia, chronic kidney disease, rheumatoid arthritis, cognitive impairment, obesity, metabolic syndrome and cancer. The working group agreed that there is insufficient evidence to date to infer causal relationships with the exception that organisms originating in the oral microbiome can cause lung infections. Conclusions The group was unanimous in their opinion that the reported associations do not imply causality, and establishment of causality will require new studies that fulfil the Bradford Hill or equivalent criteria. Precise and community-agreed case definitions of periodontal disease states must be implemented systematically to enable consistent and clearer interpretations of studies of the relationship to systemic diseases. The members of the working group were unanimous in their opinion that to develop data that best inform clinicians, investigators and the public, studies should focus on robust disease outcomes and avoid surrogate endpoints. It was concluded that because of the relative immaturity of the body of evidence for each of the purported relationships, the field is wide open and the gaps in knowledge are large. © 2013 European Federation of Periodontology and American Academy of Periodontology.

Barriers to Goals of Care Discussions With Seriously Ill Hospitalized Patients and Their Families: A Multicenter Survey of Clinicians

Importance: Seriously ill hospitalized patients have identified communication and decision making about goals of care as high priorities for quality improvement in end-of-life care. Interventions to improve care are more likely to succeed if tailored to existing barriers.

Objective: To determine, from the perspective of hospital-based clinicians, (1) barriers impeding communication and decision making about goals of care with seriously ill hospitalized patients and their families and (2) their own willingness and the acceptability for other clinicians to engage in this process.

Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter survey of medical teaching units of nurses, internal medicine residents, and staff physicians from participating units at 13 university-based hospitals from 5 Canadian provinces.

Main Outcomes and Measures: Importance of 21 barriers to goals of care discussions rated on a 7-point scale (1 = extremely unimportant; 7 = extremely important).

Results: Between September 2012 and March 2013, questionnaires were returned by 1256 of 1617 eligible clinicians, for an overall response rate of 77.7% (512 of 646 nurses [79.3%], 484 of 634 residents [76.3%], 260 of 337 staff physicians [77.2%]). The following family member-related and patient-related factors were consistently identified by all 3 clinician groups as the most important barriers to goals of care discussions: family members' or patients' difficulty accepting a poor prognosis (mean [SD] score, 5.8 [1.2] and 5.6 [1.3], respectively), family members' or patients' difficulty understanding the limitations and complications of life-sustaining treatments (5.8 [1.2] for both groups), disagreement among family members about goals of care (5.8 [1.2]), and patients' incapacity to make goals of care decisions (5.6 [1.2]). Clinicians perceived their own skills and system factors as less important barriers. Participants viewed it as acceptable for all clinician groups to engage in goals of care discussions-including a role for advance practice nurses, nurses, and social workers to initiate goals of care discussions and be a decision coach.

Conclusions and Relevance: Hospital-based clinicians perceive family member-related and patient-related factors as the most important barriers to goals of care discussions. All health care professionals were viewed as playing important roles in addressing goals of care. These findings can inform the design of future interventions to improve communication and decision making about goals of care.