One hundred and 16 patients contributed to an analysis of the impact of the consequences of severe haemophilia A or B (factor levels < 2%) on orthopaedic status, resources consumed in relation to this status and resultant cost, and quality of life as perceived by the patient, using the MOS 36-Item-Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). This French cross-sectional study involved outpatients regularly attending a haemophilia treatment centre. Data were collected retrospectively over a period of 1 year by the physician of the haemophilia treatment centre. Patients had a mean age of 23, and consisted of 50% students, 25% salaried workers, 17.2% with no professional activity and 7.8% physically impaired; 82.8% of them had type A haemophilia. Mean pain score was 2.5 per patient for the six main joints; 7.7 for the clinical score and 18.8 for the radiological score, with a mean number of bleeds of 16.3 per year per patient. During the year prior to inclusion, and because of their orthopaedic status, 22.4% of patients were hospitalized, 76.7% attended for an outpatient visit and 76.7% required at least one special investigation; 97.4% received replacement therapy, 41.4% required treatment for joint pain and 42.2% orthopaedic equipment. The less affected dimensions were the physical function (76.8 +/- 22. 2) and the social relations (76.1 +/- 23.1). Least good quality of life scores concerned the pain (60.2 +/- 25.2), perception of general health (59.3 +/- 23.1) and vitality (57.8 +/- 19.5) dimensions. The age was a discriminant criterion since quality of life was better in patients of the 18-23 age group for five dimensions. Mean annual treatment costs of a patient with severe haemophilia were determined as 425 762 French francs ($73 029). Loss of production was estimated at a mean of 4609 French francs ($791) per active patient over the course of the year. Results showed indirect evidence of the usefulness of early home treatment.

The aim of this study was to investigate in a large population of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea and on long-term treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) the patients' perception of symptomatic improvement, side-effects and quality of life. Questionnaires were mailed via local respiratory homecare associations to 5,339 French patients who had been treated at home for at least 6 months with CPAP machines and who continued their treatment. In total, 3,225 questionnaires were analysable. More than 80% of the responding patients reported that CPAP treatment had greatly improved their symptoms. Despite discomfort related to nasal problems and excess noise from the blower, the mean rate of use for the whole population was 6 h 36 min+/-2 h 15 min. The perceived health evaluated by the Nottingham Health Profile was good (mean score <50) for at least 75% of the patients in each dimension explored. The perceived health was significantly related to the improvement in symptoms, the overall satisfaction and the objective compliance. This retrospective study indicates that patients who continued continuous positive airway pressure treatment for more than 6 months felt a great improvement in their symptoms, were satisfied with the treatment and had a relatively good perception of their health.

No abstract

The purpose of this review of the literature is to examine the factors and their influence on the outcome of endodontic treatments, and also to attempt to have an authors' consensus concerning the impact of these factors on long-term results. The documentary research was conducted using the meta-analysis principles of critical reading of the literature. Two groups of factors can be identified regarding the outcome of endodontic treatments: those which influence the success of the procedure and those which do not significantly affect the success rate. Agreement is obtained in all studies on two major factors, the preoperative periapical status and the apical limit of the obturation, which appear to strongly influence the success of endodontic therapy. This review highlights the methodological problems of retrospective studies and points out the need for consensus regarding the evaluation criteria of root canal therapy.

No abstract