No abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the parental attitude toward different management techniques used during dental treatment of schoolchildren in Kuwait. Subjects and Methods: One hundred and eighteen parents who accompanied their children to the clinics of Hawally School Oral Health Program in Kuwait participated in this study. The parents viewed a videotape which showed scenes of different behavioral management techniques (BMTs) and then completed a questionnaire. Results: Positive reinforcement, effective communication, tell-show-do, distraction, modeling and nonverbal communication were considered as the most approved techniques. Hypnosis and parental separation were moderately approved techniques. Voice control, nitrous oxide sedation, protective stabilization (physical restraint), general anesthesia, hand-over-mouth technique and conscious sedation were the least approved techniques. A majority (99%) of parents regarded the use of various BMTs as a key factor for successful dental care for their children. Acceptance of each BMT was not related to parental age, gender, nationality, educational level or occupation. Conclusion: Most parents preferred the nonpharmacological techniques to pharmacological techniques. Techniques employing drugs and restraint were considered as least acceptable. Further studies comparing the effectiveness of various BMTs are required.

No abstract

No abstract

attributes: dosing frequency, blood sugar (HbA1c) change, weight change, type of delivery system, frequency of nausea, and frequency of hypoglycemia. Part-worth utilities were estimated using logit regression models and used to calculate relative importance (RI) values for each attribute. Prior to completion of the DCE, participants were queried about willingness to self-inject medication for T2DM. Following the DCE, participants were asked their willingness to take medication represented by dulaglutide and liraglutide medication profiles. Results: Final analytic samples consisted of 182 participants in Japan and 243 from the UK. In both studies, dosing frequency, type of delivery system, and frequency of nausea were the top 3 most important attributes, in rank order, with minor variation in the relative importance of each attribute across countries. Pre-study willingness to take injectable medication was significantly lower in Japan (1.7%) compared to the UK (37.9%) (p< 0.0001). Post-DCE willingness to take medication represented by dulaglutide and liraglutide medication profiles also differed, with fewer Japanese participants 'somewhat willing' or 'very willing' (dulaglutide: 42.9%; liraglutide: 4.4%) compared to their UK counterparts (dulaglutide: 77.0%; liraglutide: 30.5%). ConClusions: Rank-order of RI for treatment characteristics of dulaglutide and liraglutide were similar across countries with dosing frequency ranked highest, followed by type of delivery system. Patients from both countries were more willing to self-inject at the end of the study; UK patients were more willing than Japanese patients at both time points.