BackgroundThe aim of the present study was to compare clinically the incidence of postoperative pain after endodontic treatment using the Reciproc System, taking into account the operator’s experience.Material and MethodsOne hundred patients scheduled for routine endodontic treatment were enrolled in this study. Endodontic treatment was carried out in a single visit by undergraduate and postgraduate students. The chemomechanical preparation of root canals was performed with Reciproc instruments. Pretreatment and postoperative pain was recorded using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Postoperative pain and the need for analgesic consumption were assessed at 4, 8, 16, 24, 48 and 72 hours post-treatment. The data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U and Chi-Square test, and the significance was set at P<0.05.ResultsThe mean value of pain after root canal treatment was 1.13±1.94 and 1.91±2.07 on a VAS between 0 and 10 in treatments performed by undergraduate and postgraduate students, respectively. There was a significant difference in the incidence of postoperative pain between the two groups (P<0.05).ConclusionsThe prevalence of postoperative pain was high in the treatments performed by postgraduate students in comparison with undergraduate students. This suggests that operator experience has an influence on the prevalence of postoperative pain after root canal treatment. Key words:Post-endodontic pain, root canal treatment, reciprocating systems, Expert operators Inexperienced operators.

Objective Monitoring and feedback to physicians on their prescribing patterns helps to promote change in the areas where it is needed. However, behaviour and satisfaction of general paediatricians with the routine monitoring of their prescribing has not been measured. We aimed to develop a set of valid indicators of prescribing quality in paediatric primary care practice, and to evaluate the satisfaction of paediatricians with such indicators. Methods Prescribing indicators were chosen by consensus-group technique. All paediatricians in the Primary Health Care Area, where the study took place, received feedback with indicators within 1 year. The face validity of these indicators was assessed by collecting data from anonymous questionnaires sent to the paediatricians issuing prescriptions. Key findings Twelve prescribing indicators were identified to be appropriate for assessing the quality of therapeutic management in common illness in children in primary care. Consensus was reached on four indicators suitable for application to continuous monitoring. They focused on the relative use of broad-and narrow-spectrum antibiotics, the relative use of inhaled beta-agonists and inhaled steroids and the relative use of inhaled steroids compared with leukotriene antagonists. Thirty-seven paediatricians (93%) filled out the questionnaire. Antibiotic indicators were well accepted by 92% of them. Fifty-four per cent of paediatricians thought that the proposed asthma indicators do not reflect prescribing quality for this disease. Conclusion Indicators assessing prescribing quality by primary care paediatricians should be based on anti-asthmatics and antibiotics. Periodic feedback with these indicators increases professional satisfaction and contributes to improved drug selection in the opinion of paediatricians. Opinion was divided on the use of such indicators with respect to the distribution of financial incentives.

Introducing a system for computer-aided prescribing significantly reduced the number of administrative visits for prescription renewal for long-term treatment. This could help reduce the administrative burden considerably in primary care if the system were used in all centers.

No abstract

The European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) is the network of public health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and entities from across the EU. In this context, the HTA Core Model, has been developed. The Andalusian Agency for Health Technology Assessment (AETSA) is a member of the Spanish HTA Network and EUnetHTA collaboration In addition, AETSA participates in the new EUnetHTA Joint Action 3 (JA, 2016-2019). Furthermore, AETSA works on pharmaceutical assessments. Part of this work involves drafting therapeutic positioning reports (TPRs) on drugs that have recently been granted marketing authorisation, which is overseen by the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS). AETSA contributes by drafting "Evidence synthesis reports: pharmaceuticals" in which a rapid comparative efficacy and safety assessment is performed for drugs for which a TPR will be created. To create this type of report, AETSA follows its own methodological guideline based on EUnetHTA guidelines and the HTA Core Model. In this paper, the methodology that AETSA has developed to create the guideline for "Evidence synthesis reports: pharmaceuticals" is described. The structure of the report itself is also presented.