Recent discoveries of human genetic leptin deficiency have demonstrated its importance in regulating weight gain in early childhood. To investigate whether normal variation in leptin and insulin levels in cord blood could influence infancy growth, we assayed samples from 197 infants from a representative birth cohort, who were measured at birth, 4, 8, 12 and 24 months. Cord leptin levels correlated most closely with weight and ponderal index (kg/m3) at birth, but also with length and head circumference (all p<0.0005). Independent of birth size, females had higher leptin levels than males (p<0.0005). Cord levels of leptin, but not insulin, were negatively related to weight gain (p<0.005) from birth to 4 months, and accounted for 9.4% of the variance in weight gain, compared with breast/bottle feeding (3.5%) and early/late introduction of solids (1%). The effect of leptin levels on weight gain was independent of birthweight, and was still evident at 24 months. The wide variation in infancy growth ('catch-up' or 'catch-down') may be partly determined by leptin levels preset in utero. Our data support a role for leptin in the regulation of infancy weight gain, and suggest a mechanism whereby infants may 'catch-up' in growth postnatally following an adverse intrauterine environment.
ObjectivesChild dental caries is a global public health challenge with high prevalence and wide inequalities. A complex public health programme (Childsmile) was established. We aimed to evaluate the reach of the programme and its impact on child oral health.SettingEducation, health and community settings, Scotland-wide.InterventionsChildsmile (national oral health improvement programme) interventions: nursery-based fluoride varnish applications (FVAs) and supervised daily toothbrushing, community-based Dental Health Support Worker (DHSW) contacts and primary care dental practice visits—delivered to the population via a proportionate universal approach.Participants50 379 children (mean age=5.5 years, SD=0.3) attending local authority schools (2014/2015).DesignPopulation-based individual child-level data on four Childsmile interventions linked to dental inspection survey data to form a longitudinal cohort. Logistic regression assessed intervention reach and the independent impact of each intervention on caries experience, adjusting for age, sex and area-based Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD).Outcome measuresReach of the programme is defined as the percentage of children receiving each intervention at least once by SIMD fifth. Obvious dental caries experience (presence/absence) is defined as the presence of decay (into dentine), missing (extracted) due to decay or filled deciduous teeth.Results15 032 (29.8%) children had caries experience. The universal interventions had high population reach: nursery toothbrushing (89.1%), dental practice visits (70.5%). The targeted interventions strongly favoured children from the most deprived areas: DHSW contacts (SIMD 1: 29.5% vs SIMD 5: 7.7%), nursery FVAs (SIMD 1: 75.2% vs SIMD 5: 23.2%). Odds of caries experience were markedly lower among children participating in nursery toothbrushing (>3 years, adjusted OR (aOR)=0.60; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.66) and attending dental practice (≥6 visits, aOR=0.55; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.61). The findings were less clear for DHSW contacts. Nursery FVAs were not independently associated with caries experience.ConclusionsThe universal interventions, nursery toothbrushing and regular dental practice visits were independently and most strongly associated with reduced odds of caries experience in the cohort, with nursery toothbrushing having the greatest impact among children in areas of high deprivation.
Objective: This study sought to investigate whether the immediate systemic inflammatory response following full-mouth debridement differs following use of hand compared with ultrasonic instruments.Methods: Thirty-nine periodontitis patients were randomized to treatment with full-mouth debridement using either hand or ultrasonic instrumentation completed within 24 hr. Serum and periodontal clinical parameters were collected at baseline, day 1, day 7 and day 90 post-treatment. Differences in systemic inflammatory markers were assessed using general linear models at each timepoint, corrected for age, gender, smoking status, body mass index and baseline levels of each marker.Results: Across all patients, serum C-reactive protein increased at day 1, with no differences between hand and ultrasonic groups (p(adjusted) = .22). There was no difference between groups in interleukin-6 (p(adjusted) = .29) or tumour necrosis factor α (p(adjusted) = .53) at day 1. Inflammatory markers returned to baseline levels by day 7. Treatment resulted in equal and marked improvements in clinical parameters in both groups; however, total treatment time was on average shorter for ultrasonic instruments (p(adjusted) = .002).Conclusions: Ultrasonic instrumentation resulted in shorter treatment time with comparable clinical outcomes. Levels of serum C-reactive protein at day 1 were similar following debridement with hand or ultrasonic instruments.
Background Dental caries is one of the most prevalent non-communicable disease globally and can have serious health sequelae impacting negatively on quality of life. In the UK most adults experience dental caries during their lifetime and the 2009 Adult Dental Health Survey reported that 85% of adults have at least one dental restoration. Conservative removal of tooth tissue for both primary and secondary caries reduces the risk of failure due to tooth-restoration, complex fracture as well as remaining tooth surfaces being less vulnerable to further caries. However, despite its prevalence there is no consensus on how much caries to remove prior to placing a restoration to achieve optimal outcomes. Evidence for selective compared to complete or near-complete caries removal suggests there may be benefits for selective removal in sustaining tooth vitality, therefore avoiding abscess formation and pain, so eliminating the need for more complex and costly treatment or eventual tooth loss. However, the evidence is of low scientific quality and mainly gleaned from studies in primary teeth. Method This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, two-arm patient randomised controlled clinical trial including an internal pilot set in primary dental care in Scotland and England. Dental health professionals will recruit 623 participants over 12-years of age with deep carious lesions in their permanent posterior teeth. Participants will have a single tooth randomised to either the selective caries removal or complete caries removal treatment arm. Baseline measures and outcome data (during the 3-year follow-up period) will be assessed through clinical examination, patient questionnaires and NHS databases. A mixed-method process evaluation will complement the clinical and economic outcome evaluation and examine implementation, mechanisms of impact and context. The primary outcome at three years is sustained tooth vitality. The primary economic outcome is net benefit modelled over a lifetime horizon. Clinical secondary outcomes include pulp exposure, progession of caries, restoration failure; as well as patient-centred and economic outcomes. Discussion SCRiPT will provide evidence for the most clinically effective and cost-beneficial approach to managing deep carious lesions in permanent posterior teeth in primary care. This will support general dental practitioners, patients and policy makers in decision making. Trial Registration Trial registry: ISRCTN. Trial registration number: ISRCTN76503940. Date of Registration: 30.10.2019. URL of trial registry record: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN76503940?q=ISRCTN76503940%20&filters=&sort=&offset=1&totalResults=1&page=1&pageSize=10&searchType=basic-search.
Background The champion model is increasingly being adopted to improve uptake of guideline-based care in long-term care (LTC). Studies suggest that an on-site champion may improve the quality of care residents’ health outcomes. This review assessed the effectiveness of the champion on staff adherence to guidelines and subsequent resident outcomes in LTC homes. Method This was a systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Eligible studies included residents aged 65 or over and nursing staff in LTC homes where there was a stand-alone or multi-component intervention that used a champion to improve staff adherence to guidelines and resident outcomes. The measured outcomes included staff adherence to guidelines, resident health outcomes, quality of life, adverse events, satisfaction with care, or resource use. Study quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool; evidence certainty was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results After screening 4367 citations, we identified 12 articles that included the results of 1 RCT and 11 cluster-RCTs. All included papers evaluated the effects of a champion as part of a multicomponent intervention. We found low certainty evidence that champions as part of multicomponent interventions may improve staff adherence to guidelines. Effect sizes varied in magnitude across studies including unadjusted risk differences (RD) of 4.1% [95% CI: − 3%, 9%] to 44.8% [95% CI: 32%, 61%] for improving pressure ulcer prevention in a bed and a chair, respectively, RD of 44% [95% CI: 17%, 71%] for improving depression identification and RD of 21% [95% CI: 12%, 30%] for improving function-focused care to residents. Conclusion Champions may improve staff adherence to evidence-based guidelines in LTC homes. However, methodological issues and poor reporting creates uncertainty around these findings. It is premature to recommend the widespread use of champions to improve uptake of guideline-based care in LTC without further study of the champion role and its impact on cost. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42019145579. Registered on 20 August 2019.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.