Patient perspectives of a diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasm in a case control study

Background: Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) including the classic entities; polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis are rare diseases with unknown aetiology. The MOSAICC study, is an exploratory case–control study in which information was collected through telephone questionnaires and medical records. Methods: As part of the study, 106 patients with MPN were asked about their perceived diagnosis and replies correlated with their haematologist’s diagnosis. For the first time, a patient perspective on their MPN diagnosis and classification was obtained. Logistic regression analyses were utilised to evaluate the role of variables in whether or not a patient reported their diagnosis during interview with co-adjustment for these variables. Chi square tests were used to investigate the association between MPN subtype and patient reported categorisation of MPN. Results: Overall, 77.4 % of patients reported a diagnosis of MPN. Of those, 39.6 % recognised MPN as a ‘blood condition’,23.6 % recognised MPN as a ‘cancer’ and 13.2 % acknowledged MPN as an ‘other medical condition’. There was minimal overlap between the categories. Patients with PV were more likely than those with ET to report their disease as a ‘blood condition’. ET patients were significantly more likely than PV patients not to report their condition at all.Patients from a single centre were more likely to report their diagnosis as MPN while age, educational status, and WHO re-classification had no effect. Conclusions: The discrepancy between concepts of MPN in patients could result from differing patient interest in their condition, varying information conveyed by treating hematologists, concealment due to denial or financial concerns. Explanations for the differences in patient perception of the nature of their disease, requires further, larger scale investigation.

Content and methodology of predoctoral Geriatric Dentistry teaching in Europe

Objectives: To explore the content and methodology of predoctoral Geriatric Dentistry teaching amongst European dental schools.
Methods: The study was conducted by the European College of Gerodontology (ECG) Education Committee. Αn electronic questionnaire has been developed with close and open-ended items, including information on the prevalence and institutional anchorage of Gerodontology programs, the educators, the content and the methodology of teaching. An electronic mail, including a hyperlink to the questionnaire, was sent to 216 dental schools in 39 European countries (Winter/ Spring 2016). The Deans were asked to either answer themselves, or forward the link to faculty members with knowledge on Gerodontology teaching at their respective schools. Repeated reminders or telephone calls were used for non-respondents and personal networks were exploited to identify potential contact persons.
Results: Until August 2016, 121 dental schools from 29 countries responded to the survey (response rate 56%, EU response rate: 60%). Gerodontology was included in the predoctoral curricula of 86% of the respondents and was compulsory in 68%. The course was mainly offered in senior students and was interdisciplinary in 30% of the schools, delivered mainly by dentists (79%), physicians (21%), psychologists (10%), and nurses (5%). It was conducted as an independent lecture series in 40% of the schools and a course director was assigned in 44% of the respondents. When embedded in other disciplines, these were mainly Prosthodontics (31%). The content included a large number of items, such as epidemiology of oral health, medical problems in old age, prosthodontic management, xerostomia, and caries risk assessment. Lectures were the most common teaching format (69%), followed by small group seminars (27%). The most common types of educational material used were scientific articles (48%), printed textbooks (44%), lecture notes (40%) and e-learning material (21%). Clinical training was offered by 64% of the respondents, within the dental school clinics (49%) and/or in outreach locations (40%).
Conclusion: Amongst the respondent European dental schools (66%) there is an increasing number that teach Gerodontology at a pre-doctoral level with significant variations in content and methodology. Official guidelines and the dissemination of the ECG pre-doctoral curriculum guidelines might help to increase the prevalence and improve the status of Gerodontology teaching in Europe.