PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J S Feine

Publications and source records attributed to J S Feine.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

The effects of mandibular two-implant overdentures on nutrition in elderly edentulous individuals.

It is unclear whether mandibular implant overdentures improve the nutritional state of edentulous patients better than conventional dentures. In a randomized clinical trial, we tested for post-treatment differences in nutritional status between patients with mandibular two-implant retained overdentures and those with conventional complete dentures. Edentulous subjects (ages 65-75 yrs) received two-implant mandibular overdentures (IOD, n = 30) or conventional dentures (CD, n = 30). Measures of nutritional state were gathered before and 6 mos after treatment. Significant improvements in anthropometric parameters were detected in the IOD but not in the CD group, for percent body fat (p = 0.011) and skin-fold thickness at the biceps, subscapularis, and abdomen (p < 0.05), with significant decreases in waist circumference (p < 0.0001) and waist-hip ratio (p = 0.001). Significant increases were seen in concentrations of serum albumin (p = 0.015), hemoglobin (p = 0.01), and B12 (p = 0.01). No significant between-group differences were found. These results suggest that low-cost IOD treatment may improve the nutritional state of edentulous people.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Pain expression and stimulus localisation in individuals with Down's syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with Down's syndrome do not always exhibit signs of distress in reaction to noxious stimuli comparable with the general population. This pilot study was designed to measure the ability of individuals with Down's syndrome to detect and express sensation in comparison with healthy volunteers. METHODS: In the first test, the latency of pain detection to self-administered cold stimuli on the wrist and on the temple was measured. The second test was designed to assess ability to localise cold stimuli on sites on the hand, on the face, and in the mouth. FINDINGS: 75 control individuals and 26 individuals with Down's syndrome were tested. Individuals with Down's syndrome had significantly longer median latencies than controls: Down's syndrome median (quartiles) 28.7 s (1st 18.0, 3rd 47.6); controls 20.6 s (1st 12.4, 3rd 31.0); p=0.0005. In addition, more individuals with Down's syndrome had difficulties in localising the cold stimulus. The differences in distribution for precise localisation were significant for the hand (Down's syndrome [p<0.0005] 54%; control 99%), the mouth (31%; 84%), and the face (54%; 97%). INTERPRETATION: Individuals with Down's syndrome are not insensitive to pain. However, they do express pain or discomfort more slowly and less precisely than the general population. This implies that medical teams managing these patients should use pain-control procedures, even in the absence of obvious pain manifestations.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Differences between the sexes in post-surgical pain.

It has been shown that women have a lower pain threshold and lower tolerance to some forms of experimental pain then men. However, the evidence that clinical pain is perceived differently by the two sexes is not yet as strong. The placement of intraoral implants is a highly controlled surgical procedure that we have used to investigate this possibility. Forty-eight edentulous (without teeth) subjects (27 females), aged from 35 to 63 years, received two titanium implants in the anterior mandible under local anesthesia. After the surgery, subjects completed a pain diary three times each day, rating pain intensity and unpleasantness on 100 mm visual analog scales (VAS). Once a day, they chose verbal descriptors from the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). Age of subjects, duration of surgery, the amount of local anesthetic used and the amount of pain medication taken were not statistically different for the two groups (P>/=0.32). Results showed that the senior surgeon produced significantly less pain than a 4th year resident (P=0.04). Although there were no significant differences between sexes for mean daily ratings of intensity or unpleasantness over time (P>/=0.10), most women experienced the highest intensity of pain during the day, while most men had higher pain in the evening (P=0.025). Also, the relative unpleasantness (unpleasantness/intensity ratio) increased significantly with time for males, but not for females (P=0.016). Males and females did not differ in the total number of words chosen from the MPQ (P=0.61), or in the averaged Pain Rating Index (PRI) (P=0.53). However, women used significantly more evaluative words than men (P=0.04), suggesting that woman found the overall intensity greater. These results indicate that women find post-surgical pain more intense than males, but that men are more disturbed than women by low levels of pain that last several days.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

A 12 country field study of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) and the head and neck cancer specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35) in head and neck patients. EORTC Quality of Life Group.

This study tests the reliability and validity of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) head and neck cancer module (QLQ-H&N35) and version 3.0 of the EORTC Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in 622 head and neck cancer patients from 12 countries. The patients completed the QLQ-C30, the QLQ-H&N35 and a debriefing questionnaire before antineoplastic treatment or at a follow-up. 232 patients receiving treatment completed a second questionnaire after treatment. Compliance was high and the questionnaire was well accepted by the patients. Multitrait scaling analysis confirmed the proposed scale structure of the QLQ-H&N35. The QLQ-H&N35 was responsive to differences between disease status, site and patients with different Karnofsky performance status, and to changes over time. The new physical functioning scale (with a four-point response format) of version 3.0 of the QLQ-C30 was shown to be more reliable than previous versions. Thus, the QLQ-H&N35, in conjunction with the QLQ-C30, appears to be reliable, valid and applicable to broad multicultural samples of head and neck cancer patients.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Within-subject comparison of maxillary long-bar implant-retained prostheses with and without palatal coverage: patient-based outcomes.

Although maxillary implant overdentures are used in oral rehabilitation, different designs have not been compared previously in clinical trials. This crossover trial was designed to measure differences in patient satisfaction with maxillary long-bar implant overdentures with and without palatal coverage opposed by a fixed mandibular implant-supported prosthesis. Data were also gathered on new conventional dentures and on maxillary conventional dentures opposed by mandibular fixed prostheses. Sixteen participants were selected from a population wearing conventional dentures. Fifteen received new upper and lower dentures (1 drop-out). Four implants were placed in the maxilla and mandible (2 drop-outs). A mandibular fixed prosthesis was inserted in 13 participants, who were then divided into 2 groups. One group (n = 7) received long-bar overdentures with palate, then long-bar overdentures without palate. The other group (n = 6) received the same treatments in the reverse order. Mastication tests and psychometric evaluations using Visual Analog Scales and Categorical Scales were performed throughout the study. General satisfaction was very high with both maxillary implant-supported prostheses, as were ratings of almost all psychosocial and functional variables. There were no significant differences between treatments, suggesting that patients are equally satisfied with long-bar overdentures with and without palate when these are opposed by mandibular fixed prostheses. However, the ratings given to the maxillary implant prostheses were not significantly higher than for new conventional maxillary prostheses. This suggests that maxillary implant prostheses should not be considered as a general treatment of choice in patients with good bony support for maxillary conventional prostheses.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Determinants of patients' treatment preferences in a clinical trial.

Several researchers have suggested that patients' preferences for a particular form of treatment should be taken into account in clinical trials. Preferences may influence the outcome of treatment, especially in trials when patients cannot be blinded to the type of treatment received and the outcome is based on patients' evaluations of therapy. Participants in this study were 136 edentulous patients who took part in a randomised controlled clinical trial comparing two types of treatments for edentulism: conventional dentures and implant-supported prostheses. Prior to receiving treatment, subjects were required to complete a questionnaire regarding their satisfaction with their present prostheses. In addition, they were asked to indicate which treatment they would prefer if given a choice. The objective of this study was to determine whether there are important differences among study participants between patients who have a treatment preference and those who do not. The effects of satisfaction with pre-treatment prostheses, age, gender and level of education on preferences were examined. Level of satisfaction with the original dentures and level of education were significant predictors of preference. Compared to subjects who rated their satisfaction with their current condition as 'low', the odds ratios associated with having a preference for implant treatment were 0.31 (95% CI: 0.09 to 0.96) for subjects who rated their prostheses in the 'medium' range and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.03 to 0.41) for those who rated in the 'high' range. In addition, subjects with high levels of education were significantly less likely to have a preference for either conventional or implant treatments (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.77 and OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.76, respectively) compared to those with low education. Neither age nor gender was a significant predictor of preference. We suggest that study designs which incorporate patients' preferences must take into account possible differences between preference groups that might confound the relationship between preference and the outcome of interest.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Measuring the effect of intra-oral implant rehabilitation on health-related quality of life in a randomized controlled clinical trial.

The importance of assessing the impact of treatments for chronic conditions on an individual's quality of life has been well-established. In this randomized clinical trial, oral-health-related quality of life, measured with the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP), was compared between two groups of edentulous patients. One group (n = 54) received mandibular implant-supported overdentures, and the other group (n = 48) received conventional dentures. Assessments were performed pre-treatment and two months after the prostheses were delivered. The multivariate model showed that implant treatment was significantly associated with lower post-treatment OHIP scores (p = 0.0002), indicating a better quality of life. In addition, pretreatment OHIP scores, treatment allocation, age, sex, and marital status explained 31% of the variation in post-treatment OHIP scores (F = 0.0001). These results suggest that implant treatment provides significant short-term improvement over conventional treatment in oral-health-related quality of life.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Treating chronic pain how do we measure success?

In this article, the practitioner is provided with information on common techniques to determine whether a particular treatment for a chronic temporomandibular disorder (TMD) is successful. Although most clinicians rely on patient reports of relief as the primary evidence for success, we have found that these reports are poorly correlated with changes in pain. Reports of relief may reflect other aspects of therapy, such as the patient's relationship with the health care provider or improved ability to cope. Therefore, in order to know if a treatment is truly efficacious, we suggest that the clinician measure the patient's pain before, during and after treatment. Questionnaires designed to measure pain and relief in the clinic, as well as instructions for their use, are included. These can be used to document progress and for medico-legal purposes.

Chronic Disease↗
PubMed1999

The relationship between dental status and health-related quality of life in upper aerodigestive tract cancer patients.

Although the oral sequelae of treatments for upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) cancers have been well described, very little is known about the relationship between dental status and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with UADT cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that dental status is a predictor of HRQL in a sample of post-therapeutic UADT cancer patients. A cross-sectional study design was used with a sample of 188 subjects. HRQL was evaluated through the global domain of the EORTC QLQ-C30 instrument and data were collected on sociodemographic, disease, treatment and dental status variables. Linear multiple regression analysis was used to determine those variables with a significant independent association with the HRQL. Two multivariate models were developed each containing age, gender, employment status, cancer site and disease stage, plus either the dental status category "partially dentate with no prosthesis" (P/NP) (F-value for model = 7.31; P < 0.0001; r2 = 0.20) which predicted a significantly worse HRQL, or the dental status category "edentulous with prostheses" (E/WP) (F-value for model = 7.56; P < 0.0001; r2 = 0.20) which predicted a significantly better HRQL. Furthermore, the P/NP group reported significantly more "problems with their teeth" (ANOVA, P = 0.0004), significantly more "trouble eating" (ANOVA, P = 0.024) and significantly more "trouble enjoying their meals" (ANOVA, P = 0.01). Although the cross-sectional nature of the data collection and the somewhat crude nature of the dental status variable limit inferences, the results of this study suggest that dental status has an important effect on HRQL in post-therapeutic UADT cancer patients.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

A within-subject comparison of mandibular long-bar and hybrid implant-supported prostheses: evaluation of masticatory function.

Sixteen edentulous subjects participated in a within-subject crossover clinical trial to test the hypotheses that a long-bar overdenture attached to 4 implants gives greater patient satisfaction and masticatory efficiency than a two-implant hybrid overdenture. All subjects were given a new maxillary conventional denture. Ten received mandibular long-bar overdentures first and six the hybrid overdentures. Two months later, psychometric assessments and functional tests were repeated 3 times at one-week intervals. The mandibular prosthesis was then changed, and recordings were repeated after another 2 months. Mandibular movements and electromyographic activity of jaw muscles were recorded while subjects chewed standard-sized pieces of 5 foods: bread, cheese, apple, sausage, and carrot. Measurements included masticatory time, cleaning time (the time between the end of mastication and the last swallow), and duration and amplitude of masticatory cycles and phases. Multilevel analyses were performed. No significant differences in masticatory time were found between prostheses for any test food. However, cleaning time for carrot [estimated mean of difference (delta) +/- SE: 1.6 sec +/- 0.7] and bread (delta = 1.0 sec +/- 0.4) was slightly but significantly longer for subjects wearing long-bar overdentures. Cycle duration was longer with the long-bar overdenture only for subjects chewing carrot. The opening phase was shorter and the closing phase longer with the long-bar overdenture for almost all test foods. Vertical amplitude was significantly less with the long-bar overdenture for cheese (delta = -2.6 mm +/- 1.1), apple (delta = -2.6 mm +/- 1.0), and sausage (delta = -2.9 mm +/- 1.3). These results suggest that mastication with the 2 prostheses is equally efficient, although clearance of some foods from the mouth is longer with the long-bar overdentures. They also indicate that patients adapt their masticatory movements to the characteristics of different prostheses.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Outcome assessment of implant-supported prostheses.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: From the dental professional's standpoint, implant rehabilitation offers dramatically improved treatment alternatives to orally disabled patients. However, what a patient perceives as important to their function and satisfaction with their prostheses may be quite different from what the dentist believes are significant health-related improvements. PURPOSE: To resolve this problem, a series of investigations were designed to measure satisfaction and performance in groups of patients who wore various types of prostheses supported by endosseous titanium implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Methods are described for assessing treatment efficacy and population needs, including measures of perceived levels of disability, health-related quality of life, and functional capacity. RESULTS: The findings highlight patient factors that have not been considered before and appear to contribute to the success of prosthetic rehabilitation for the edentulous patient. CONCLUSION: Patient-centered approaches to the assessment of treatment efficacy are highly relevant to today's prosthodontists, whose goals are the improvement of function and quality of life for their patients.

Choice Behavior↗
PubMed1998

Correlates of health-related quality of life in upper aerodigestive tract cancer patients.

Reflecting a limited understanding of the definition and determinants of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), the majority of research in this field has concentrated upon the effect of disease- and treatment-related variables. That work specifically investigating HRQoL among upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) cancer patients is no exception to this observation. Treating subject-related and non-subject-related variables separately, the aim of this study was to investigate predictors of global HRQoL rating in a sample of UADT cancer patients, concentrating upon the relative importance of sociodemographic and clinical variables. A cross-sectional study design was used with a sample of 188 UADT cancer patients. Global HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 instrument, global domain (global QoL). Other study variables were collected by subject interview and chart review. Two multivariate regression models were independently developed, containing, respectively, subject-rated and non-subject rated variables. In the model containing subject-rated predictors of global QoL, emotional, breathing, physical, financial, pain and appetite problems were significant predictors (F = 14.6, p < 0.0001 and r2 = 0.54). Among non-subject-rated sociodemographic and clinical variables tested, unemployment, older age, female gender, being dentate and a more advanced disease stage predicted worse global QoL rating, while oral as opposed to pharyngeal or laryngeal cancer predicted a better global QoL rating (F = 5.1, p < 0.0001 and r2 = 0.21). In the latter model, a greater proportion of the variance was explained by sociodemographic variables than by clinical variables.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

The impact of patient preference on the design and interpretation of clinical trials.

Research on several health problems shows that patients and health care providers do not use the same criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment and often disagree on the severity of symptoms. When the disease is chronic and the main aim of treatment is to improve quality of life, we argue that variables rated as important by patients should be used as outcomes in clinical trials, and that in most cases these need to be measured from subjects' self-reports. In many non-pharmacological randomized clinical trials, the subjects cannot be blinded to treatment. Furthermore, many of them will probably have a preference for a particular treatment option. It has been proposed that emotional responses following assignment of treatments, which may or may not be preferred, will strongly influence the outcome, especially when it is based on self-reports of treatment satisfaction. Because of this concern, some investigators have suggested alternative study designs that incorporate preference. Brewin & Bradley (Br Med J 1989; 299 [6694]:313-5) have proposed allocating subjects to treatment methods according to their preferences, and randomizing those individuals with no preference. To determine the influence of preference on treatment outcome, they recommend comparing results from the preference group with those of the randomized group. However, we have found that there are clear differences in level of education and in the pre-treatment state between individuals with preferences and those with no strong preferences. Therefore, we believe that the design proposed by Wennberg et al. (Ann N Y Acad Sci 1993;703:52-62) is more appropriate. In it, subjects are randomly allocated to a preference trial (subjects choose their treatment) or to a randomized trial (random allocation to treatment). Between-trial comparisons can then be used to determine the influence of preference on outcome. This will lead to better evaluation of treatment efficacy and allow better estimates of the true effectiveness to be made.

Dental Research↗
PubMed1998

Measuring patient satisfaction with mandibular prostheses.

OBJECTIVES: Previous research has shown that patients' evaluations of their prostheses correlate poorly with the clinicians' assessments, as well as with intraoral anatomic factors. It has been recommended that researchers conduct more studies that use patient satisfaction as the primary outcome measure in treatment evaluation and that more attention be paid to understanding exactly what measures of patient satisfaction represent. In this study, the relationship between patients' ratings of general satisfaction and their perceptions of different aspects of mandibular prostheses is investigated. METHODS: One hundred and twenty subjects applied to participate in a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing two types of mandibular prostheses: conventional dentures and implant prostheses. At baseline, they were asked to rate on 100 mm visual analog scales (VAS) factors that edentulous patients indicated were important to them. These included comfort, ability to chew, stability, esthetics, ability to speak and ease of cleaning of their conventional dentures. Subjects were also asked to rate their general satisfaction with their dentures. In addition, they selected the one quality of their denture that they considered to be most important. RESULTS: Multiple regression methods revealed that gender, as well as patients' ratings of comfort, stability, esthetics, ability to chew and ability to speak with their prostheses contributed significantly to general satisfaction (F<0.0001). Furthermore, 89% of the variation in ratings of general satisfaction was explained by these factors. In addition, patients who considered ability to chew as the most important factor associated with their dentures rated their general satisfaction significantly higher than the other subjects (P=0.0003). CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction with conventional dental prostheses is highly dependent on gender, and the appearance and functionality of the appliance. The combined effect of these factors explained most of the variation in the satisfaction ratings.

Adult↗