We developed a set of 16 PQIs for measuring the quality of treatment in CKD patients, which had sufficient content and face validity as well as operational feasibility. These PQIs can be used to point out priority areas for improvement.

ObjectivesPeople following a vegetarian diet could be more prone to oral health problems than people following a nonvegetarian diet. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the possible impacts of following a vegetarian diet on dental hard tissues, focusing on caries development, dental erosion and number of natural teeth.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL were searched systematically up until 17 April 2019. Original studies comparing dental health (exclusively focusing on dental hard tissues) in vegetarians and nonvegetarians were selected. Study characteristics and outcome data were extracted, and the quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale. When a dental health characteristic was reported in three or more papers in a comparable way, a meta‐analysis was performed.ResultsTwenty‐one papers reporting on 18 studies were included in this review. In meta‐analyses, the vegetarian diet was associated with a higher risk for dental erosion (odds ratio: 2.40 [95% confidence interval: 1.24, 4.66]; P = .009) and a lower decayed, missing and filled teeth (DMFT) score (mean difference: −0.15 [95% confidence interval: −0.29, −0.02]; P = .023), although the quality of most included studies was poor and the findings for DMFT score became insignificant when only studies on adults were included in the meta‐analysis. A meta‐analysis for the other dental characteristics was not possible due to the limited number of eligible studies. There was inconsistent evidence for a link between following a vegetarian diet and dental caries or the number of natural teeth.ConclusionsWithin the limitations of the present study, the findings suggest that following a vegetarian diet may be associated with a greater risk of dental erosion.

IntroductionPeriodontitis has been considered a sixth complication of diabetes. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of periodontal treatment on diabetes-related healthcare costs in patients with diabetes.Research design and methodsA retrospective analysis was done, exploiting unique and large-scale claims data of a Dutch health insurance company. Data were extracted for a cohort of adults who had been continuously insured with additional dental coverage for the years 2012–2018. Individuals with at least one diabetes-related treatment claim in 2012 were included for analysis. A series of panel data regression models with patient-level fixed effects were estimated to assess the impact of periodontal treatment on diabetes-related healthcare costs.ResultsA total of 41 598 individuals with diabetes (age range 18–100 years; 45.7% female) were included in the final analyses. The median diabetes-related healthcare costs per patient in 2012 were €38.45 per quarter (IQR €11.52–€263.14), including diagnoses, treatment, medication and hospitalization costs. The fixed effect models showed €12.03 (95% CI −€15.77 to −€8.29) lower diabetes-related healthcare costs per quarter of a year following periodontal treatment compared with no periodontal treatment.ConclusionsPeriodontitis, a possible complication of diabetes, should receive appropriate attention in diabetes management. The findings of this study provide corroborative evidence for reduced economic burdens due to periodontal treatment in patients with diabetes.

ObjectivesInsight in the prescribing quality for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) in secondary care is limited. The aim of this study is to assess the prescribing quality in secondary care patients with CKD stages 3–5 and possible differences in quality between CKD stages.DesignThis was a retrospective cohort study.SettingData were collected at two university (n=569 and n=845) and one non-university nephrology outpatient clinic (n=1718) in the Netherlands.ParticipantsBetween March 2015 and August 2016, data were collected from patients with stages 3a–5 CKD seen at the clinics. Blood pressure measurements, laboratory measurements and prescription data were extracted from medical records. For each prescribing quality indicator, patients with incomplete data required for calculation were excluded.Outcome measuresPotentially appropriate prescribing of antihypertensives, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors, statins, phosphate binders and potentially inappropriate prescribing according to prevailing guidelines was assessed using prescribing quality indicators. Χ2or Fisher’s exact tests were used to test for differences in prescribing quality.ResultsRAAS inhibitors alone or in combination with diuretics (57% or 52%, respectively) and statins (42%) were prescribed less often than phosphate binders (72%) or antihypertensives (94%) when indicated. Active vitamin D was relatively often prescribed when potentially not indicated (19%). Patients with high CKD stages were less likely to receive RAAS inhibitors but more likely to receive statins when indicated than stage 3 CKD patients. They also received more active vitamin D and erythropoietin-stimulating agents when potentially not indicated.ConclusionsPriority areas for improvement of prescribing in CKD outpatients include potential underprescribing of RAAS inhibitors and statins, and potential overprescribing of active vitamin D. CKD stage should be taken into account when assessing prescribing quality.

Twenty PQIs focusing on treatment with glucose, lipid, blood pressure and albuminuria lowering drugs, and on medication safety in type 2 diabetes were developed, considered valid and operationally feasible. Results showed room for improvement, especially in initiation and intensification of treatment as measured with clinical action indicators.