Efficacy/toxicity ratios were highest with TNF inhibitors followed by leflunomide, gold and sulfasalazine. Gold, though effective, has excessive toxicity and sulfasalazine, though of low toxicity, was also relatively ineffective.

Purpose There is an increased incidence of maxillofacial trauma all over the world. A study was conducted to find out the epidemiological characteristics of maxillofacial trauma in Northern districts of Kerala. Methods All the trauma patients who attended the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Government Dental College, Calicut, Kerala during the period of 2006-2007 was included in the study. The incidence, prevalence, age and sex distribution, seasonal and daily variations and aetiology of maxillofacial trauma were studied. The pattern and demographic distribution of fractures of maxillofacial skeleton also were studied. Results This study indicates a significant increase in the incidence of maxillofacial trauma in the region. There was a male predominance and the highest incidence was in the age group of 20-40 years. Road traffic accident was the most common aetiological factor causing maxillofacial trauma. More than 30% of trauma cases suffered fracture of maxillofacial skeleton. There was an increased incidence of midface fracture when compared to mandibular fractures in the study. Most common site of mandibular fracture was in the parasymphysis region and in the midface was the zygomatic complex region. Conclusion The increased incidence of maxillofacial trauma following road traffic accidents noted in this study reveals the need for formulating preventive measures in the state of Kerala. Increasing facilities for the management of maxillofacial trauma at local hospitals and medical colleges is mandatory. Training of the paramedical personnel, health workers and also the public regarding first aid and primary trauma care is also necessary.

No abstract

The new digital health innovations have opened up several opportunities to help the clinicians, patients and other caregivers of rheumatology healthcare system in maximizing efficiencies resulting in better patient outcomes. In the global context, digital health technology has the potential to bridge the distance gap between all the key stakeholders involved in rheumatology health care. In this review, we update on the recent advances in the field of digital health and highlight unique features of these technologies which would help in routine care. Application of technology in any form to enable, facilitate or enhance the quality of care is the foundation of digitised care. The components could be smartphone apps, sensors, video, social media platforms or messenger platforms, wearables or a combination of these enabling healthcare delivery and overcoming the constraints of distance, location and time. Digital therapeutics have started evolving and an important step in this direction is the involvement of FDA in the approval process. Speciality specific apps, personalised patient education as per disease status, remote specialist consultations or virtual health coach to guide on lifestyle modifications are some of the developments which have been facilitated by increased digitization in all walks of life. Assisted care with the help of robots rendering care in the hospitals or an intelligent robot guiding a patient by voice and visual sense at home are already at the threshold of entering the mainstream of patient care. Wearable devices equipped with powerful sensors are coming handy in keeping a watch on patient symptoms all the time and providing useful insights on disease progression, clinical response or complications. In chronic care such as rheumatology the implications, possibilities and benefits seem unprecedented. Real time data analytics and artificial intelligence are helping the clinicians, healthcare systems and policy makers optimise the resources and improve patient outcomes. Digitization of healthcare has gained momentum in the recent years and it is envisaged that it could be a catalyst to change, bridge the quality of care and most important democratise the healthcare access across the globe. However, more data, efficacy and objective results are needed which would be fulfilled by ongoing observational studies, clinical trials, systematic review and meta-analysis to further establish the role of digital health in the realms of patient care.

In a proportion of patients, chikungunya arthritis (CA) might run into a chronic persistent phase. The treatment for this phase is not very clear. In this randomized parallel group open label study of 24 weeks duration, we evaluated the efficacy of DMARD combination in persistent CA. Consecutive 139 patients with persistent CA (persistent arthritis for >1 year after the chikungunya fever either in 2008 or 2009 fulfilling epidemiological criteria for CA) were screened. Of these patients who were already taking hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and had active arthritis were randomized to receive either fixed-dose combination therapy (methotrexate 15 mg/day, sulfasalazine 1 g/day, and HCQ 400 mg/day) or continue with HCQ 400 mg/day (dose optimized) monotherapy. Both groups received oral prednisolone up to 6 weeks. Assessments at every 4 weeks were carried out for primary efficacy (disease activity score; DAS ESR 28) and secondary efficacies, HAQ-Indian version and pain VAS100mm. Seventy-two patients were randomized (37 combination therapy, 35 monotherapy). Both groups were well matched in all respects. At 24 weeks, the combination therapy group showed significant improvement in both disease activity (mean ± SD DAS28; 3.39 ± 0.87 vs. 4.74 ± 0.65, p < 0.0001) and disability (mean ± SD HAQ; 1.4 ± 0.31 vs. 1.88 ± 0.47, p < 0.0001). At the study end, pain VAS was significantly less in the combination therapy group (46 ± 6.13 vs. 60.8 ± 11.6, p < 0.0001). Three patients withdrew from the combination group (inefficacy; 2, adverse event; 1) and seven from monotherapy (inefficacy; 7). This study provide evidence that for chronic persistent CA combination DMARD therapy with methotrexate, sulfasalazine and HCQ is superior to monotherapy with HCQ.