Introdução: Estudos epidemiológicos demonstram elevada prevalência de sinais e/ou sintomas de Disfunção Temporomandibular (DTM) na população adulta. Contudo, poucos estudos avaliaram esta disfunção na atenção primária à saúde. Objetivo: Avaliar prevalência de sintomas de DTM, fatores associados e, impacto sobre qualidade de vida em usuários da rede de atenção primária à saúde da cidade de Maceió/AL. Método: Avaliou-se 108 participantes quanto a presença de sintomas de DTM (índice anamnésico DMF),sintomas sugestivos de ansiedade e depressão (escala Hospital Anxiety and Depression- HAD), e sintomas sugestivos de estresse (Inventário de Sintomas de Stress para Adultos - ISSL); além da qualidade de vida relacionada a saúde oral, avaliada pela versão resumida do Oral Health-related (OHIP-14). Resultados: 55,6% apresentaram sintomas de DTM e 19,4% exibiram necessidade de tratamento. O sexo feminino e o autorrelato de hábitos parafuncionais foram preditores para os sintomas de DTM, e o estresse e hábitos para a necessidade de tratamento. Os sintomas de DTM, mesmo leves, promoveram impacto negativo sobre a qualidade de vida. Conclusão: Desta forma, os resultados apresentados sugerem necessidade de preparo e organização da rede de atenção à saúde, nos diferentes níveis, para garantir acesso e tratamento adequados aos pacientes com DTM e Dor Orofacial.
Aim: To determine the scientific evidence regarding the condition of periodontal diseases (PDs) as risk factors of coronary artery diseases. Materials and methods:A scoping review was performed through the selection of articles from online databases (Medline via PubMed, LILACS, and Cochrane CENTRAL), using a search algorithm and eligibility criteria for data extraction and data synthesis of included papers. Four hundred forty-one studies from online databases and 1364 from reference lists were initially identified, and 34 articles were selected for inclusion. Articles had to be published between 2015 and 2020 and had to associate PDs to coronary arterial diseases. All studies comprised a sample of 446443 participants. Favorable opinions totaled 70.59%, and the cross-sectional observational study design was more frequently found (32.35%). Biochemical outcomes were showed more frequently, such as inflammatory biomarkers (58.82%). Despite a large advantage for favorable opinions, a statistically significant result was not found when extracted data were combined with studies opinions. Conclusion:The evidence was classified as level II-3, hence, still distant from the best ranks and can therefore be considered as unclear. Moreover, studies with the higher potential to generate evidence showed a high risk of bias.
Review question / Objective: What is the effectiveness of Early Tracheostomy compared with Late Tracheostomy Or Prolonged Orotracheal Intubation in Traumatic Brain Injury? Eligibility criteria: The inclusion criteria are (P) studies with patients above 18 years old, male or female, who had a severe traumatic brain injury and who need advanced airway support; (I) patient undergoing early tracheostomy (less than 10 days of orotraqueal intubation); (C) patient undergoing late tracheostomy (after 10 days of orotraqueal intubation) or undergoing prolonged intubation; (O) With data about mortality, time on ICU stay, on Hospital stay and time free of mechanical ventilation, complications related a health care services (pneumonia, septicemia, candidemia, Pressure ulcers, thromboembolic events and time using antibiotics), Quality of life (scores about neurological functions); e (S) Systematic reviews. No language restrictions. The exclusion criteria are data about mortality without data about time and follow up (In Hospital or after discharge?). We will contact the authors of studies without data enough to make a decision or without full text available, If we do not have answers we will exclude the study.
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
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.