ObjectiveDental plaque accumulation and inadequate personal oral hygiene (OH) are known major risk factors of periodontitis. Nevertheless, the magnitude of their effects has not yet been the subject of a meta‐analysis.Material and methodsThe Medline and Scopus databases were searched up to May 2016. Observational studies were eligible if they assessed associations between OH and periodontitis in adult subjects. A multivariate random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to pool the effects of fair/poor OH versus good OH on periodontitis across studies. The associations between oral care habits and periodontitis were also assessed.ResultsA total of 50 studies were eligible; 15 were used for pooling the effect of fair OH versus good OH and poor OH versus good OH on periodontitis, with pooled odds ratios (ORs) of 2.04 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.65–2.53] and 5.01 (95% CI: 3.40–7.39), respectively. Eleven studies examined oral care habits measured according to toothbrushing regularity and dental visit frequency; pooled ORs of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.47–0.94) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.47–0.98) were obtained, respectively.ConclusionsFair to poor OH increases the risk of periodontitis by two‐ to five‐fold. This risk can be reduced by regular toothbrushing and dental visits.

Lateral pinning is preferable to cross pinning for fixation of pediatric supracondylar humerus fractures as a result of decreased risk of ulnar nerve injury.

Median plasma efavirenz levels were comparable among both groups. Efavirenz 600 mg/day should be sufficient for most Thai HIV-infected patients receiving rifampicin with body weight approximately 50 kg. These results may not be applicable to other ethic populations who have higher body weights. However, the study of long-term virological and immunological outcomes is needed and under further investigation.

The potential of drug-drug interaction between efavirenz and rifampicin is a major concern in the treatment of HIV and tuberculosis. The optimal efavirenz dosage is still unclear. Our randomized control trial study recently reported the similar efavirenz level between efavirenz 600 and 800 mg/day in HIV-infected patients receiving rifampicin. We report the similar virological and immunological outcomes at 48 weeks between the two groups. Efavirenz 600 mg/day should be sufficient for concurrent use with rifamipicin.

Vitamin D supplementation effects with or without calcium in pregnancy for reducing risk of preeclampsia and gestational or pregnancy induced hypertension are controversial. Literature was systematically searched in Medline, Scopus and Cochrane databases from inception to July 2017. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in English were selected if they had any pair of interventions (calcium, vitamin D, both, or placebo). Systematic review with two-step network-meta-analysis was used to indirectly estimate supplementary effects. Twenty-seven RCTs with 28,000 women were eligible. A direct meta-analysis suggested that calcium, vitamin D, and calcium plus vitamin D could lower risk of preeclampsia when compared to placebo with the pooled risk ratios (RRs) of 0.54 (0.41, 0.70), 0.47 (0.24, 0.89) and 0.50 (0.32, 0.78), respectively. Results of network meta-analysis were similar with the corresponding RRs of 0.49 (0.35, 0.69), 0.43 (0.17, 1.11), and 0.57 (0.30, 1.10), respectively. None of the controls were significant. Efficacy of supplementation, which was ranked by surface under cumulative ranking probabilities, were: vitamin D (47.4%), calcium (31.6%) and calcium plus vitamin D (19.6%), respectively. Calcium supplementation may be used for prevention for preeclampsia. Vitamin D might also worked well but further large scale RCTs are warranted to confirm our findings.

Seventy human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients receiving rifampicin and 70 HIV-infected patients not receiving rifampicin were enrolled to receive 400 mg of nevirapine-based highly active antiretroviral therapy per day. Mean plasma nevirapine levels at 8 and 12 weeks were lower in patients receiving rifampicin (P=.048). However, virological and immunological outcomes at 24 weeks were not different between the 2 groups (P>.05).

AIM:To evaluate the effectiveness of simethicone in enhancing visibility and efficacy during colonoscopy. METHODS:A prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted. One hundred and twenty-four patients were allocated to receive 2 doses of sodium phosphate plus 240 mg of tablet simethicone or placebo as bowel preparation. Visibility was blindly assessed for the amount of air bubbles and adequacy of colon preparation. Total colonoscopic time, side effects of the medication, endoscopist and patient satisfaction were also compared. RESULTS:Sodium phosphate plus simethicone, compared to sodium phosphate plus placebo, improved visibility by diminishing air bubbles (100.00% vs 42.37%, P < 0.0001) but simethicone failed to demonstrate improvement in adequacy of colon preparation (90.16% vs 81.36%, P = 0.17). Endoscopist and patient satisfaction were increased significantly in the simethicone group. However, there was no difference in the total duration of colonoscopy and side effects of the medication. CONCLUSION:The addition of simethicone is of benefit for colonoscopic bowel preparation by diminishing air bubbles, which results in enhanced visibility. Endoscopist and patient satisfaction is also increased.

No abstract