Whitehall Papers最新文献

Study design: Retrospective, descriptive observational study.

Objective: The need for revision surgery after mandibular fractures is an indicator for severe postoperative complications. This study aimed to characterise this patient cohort, describe solutions to deal with complications and evaluate treatment quality as a risk variable for complications.

Methods: Patients with revision surgery with refixation after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a mandible fracture were included. Patient- and therapy-specific information were assessed together with postoperative complications. The quality of fixation was evaluated individually by 6 specialists. Interobserver agreement was analysed using Fleiss' kappa.

Results: Out of 630 patients, inclusion criteria were met by 17 patients (14 male, 3 female) with an average age of 43.3 (±15.5) years. Complications at the mandible body/angle/symphysis led to refixation in all cases. Main indications for refixation were osteomyelitis (52.9%) or pseudarthrosis (41.2%). Risk factors were drug-related immune suppression, local infection or substance abuse (nicotine, alcohol or drugs). Six patients did not present any of these predictors. Of these, treatment of 4 patients was rated as not in accordance to the AO principles. The interrater reliability of treatment quality assessments was .239.

Conclusions: Patients with risk factors need to be carefully observed perioperatively after ORIF of mandibular fractures and treatments need to be adapted to these patients. Discrepancies of treatments to common guidelines may also be an independent predictor for treatment failure in patients without risk factors. Current treatment guidelines should be re-evaluated concerning additional treatment strategies for patients with specific risk factors.

Objective: To detect subtle linguistic performance deficits in patients with schizophrenia, a test battery was developed in Hindi vernacular language.

Method: It was a replication study of observational, analytical, and case-control design. Total of 86 participants, namely 43 patients with schizophrenia and 43 controls, were recruited into the study. The patients were evaluated by using PANSS (positive and negative symptoms scale for schizophrenia) for recruitment into the study. Participants from the general population were evaluated with GHQ-12 (General Health Questionnaire-12) to be found to fit as healthy controls. Subsequently, the linguistic performance of patients (on HLFT: Hindi linguistic function test) was compared with that of controls. The HLFT battery was designed, containing 3 blocks by using antonyms, synonyms, homonyms, hyperonyms, hyponyms, distractors, and adages.

Result: Patients scored significantly less than that of controls in identifying antonyms, distractors, and hyponyms while in identifying homonyms they scored significantly more than that of controls. At block I (antonyms) score of 15.5; at homonym score of 5.5; at hyponym (as in hyponym plus distractor combination) score of 2.5, the sensitivity and specificity for using them as a cutoff to screen for schizophrenia are 60.5% and 67.4%; 86% and 41.9%; 81.4% and 46.5%, respectively.

Conclusion: Ambiguity processing of taxonomic representation such as antonymia, homonymia, hypo-/hyperonymia, synonymia, and also understanding of adages might be significantly impaired in patients with schizophrenia. The HLFT battery could be used as a quick and sensitive instrument to detect and quantify the linguistic difficulties of patients with schizophrenia.