Ashwini Rao

Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines

INTRODUCTIONnCase series have been a long held tradition within the surgical literature and are still frequently published. Reporting guidelines can improve transparency and reporting quality. No guideline exists for reporting case series, and our recent systematic review highlights the fact that key data are being missed from such reports. Our objective was to develop reporting guidelines for surgical case series.nnnMETHODSnA Delphi consensus exercise was conducted to determine items to include in the reporting guideline. Items included those identified from a previous systematic review on case series and those included in the SCARE Guidelines for case reports. The Delphi questionnaire was administered via Google Forms and conducted using standard Delphi methodology. Surgeons and others with expertise in the reporting of case series were invited to participate. In round one, participants voted to define case series and also what elements should be included in them. In round two, participants voted on what items to include in the PROCESS guideline using a nine-point Likert scale to assess agreement as proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) working group.nnnRESULTSnIn round one, there was a 49% (29/59) response rate. Following adjustment of the guideline with incorporation of recommended changes, round two commenced and there was an 81% (48/59) response rate. All but one of the items were approved by the participants and Likert scores 7-9 were awarded by >70% of respondents. The final guideline consists of an eight item checklist.nnnCONCLUSIONnWe present the PROCESS Guideline, consisting of an eight item checklist that will improve the reporting quality of surgical case series. We encourage authors, reviewers, editors, journals, publishers and the wider surgical and scholarly community to adopt these.

Antimicrobial Efficacy of Punica granatum mesocarp, Nelumbo nucifera Leaf, Psidium guajava Leaf and Coffea Canephora Extract on Common Oral Pathogens: An In-vitro Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESnAlternative therapies are increasingly being explored as extensive use of synthetic chemicals has led to the emergence of substantial side effects. Phytomedicine has been well practiced as traditional medicine in various cultures for treatment of oral diseases. It has gained importance of late as an alternative to the conventional therapy. Various plant and fruit extracts have been monitored recently to assess their potential against the common oral pathogens. Aim of this study was to assess in-vitro efficacy of pomegranate peel, lotus leaf, guava leaf and coffee extracts on oral microorganisms.nnnMATERIALS AND METHODSnConcentrations of 1%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% were prepared for each, followed by efficacy testing using disc diffusion method against Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus mitis, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia and Candida albicans.nnnRESULTSnAll the four extracts were found to be effective against S.mutans and S.mitis, with maximum efficacy against S.mutans and S.mitis displayed by pomegranate and lotus. Antifungal efficacy was demonstrated by coffee and pomegranate. Guava, lotus and coffee were effective against P.intermedia, while only coffee was found to be effective against P. gingivalis. All the results were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05).nnnINTERPRETATION & CONCLUSIONnPomegranate, guava, lotus and coffee displayed significant anticariogenic effect while coffee was found to be most effective against periodontal pathogens as well as Candida albicans. RESULTS revealed that natural products may be used as economical and suitable adjuvant to synthetic medicines and compounds and their judicious use might not only help to inhibit the side effects of synthetic chemicals but also prove to be cost effective in developing economies.

Effect of motives for food choice on oral health among primary school children in Mangalore: An analytical survey

INTRODUCTIONnParents influence childrens eating behaviours by making some foods available than others and by acting as models of eating behaviour. Food selected by parents influence general and oral health of their children.nnnAIMnAim of this study was to assess oral health parameters among primary school children and motives for food choice among their parents in Mangalore.nnnMATERIALS AND METHODSnA total of 759 primary school children aged 5-10 years, and their parents participated in this study. Motives for food choice among parents of children were evaluated by using Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ). Oral health status of students was assessed by using World Health Organisation (WHO) Basic Oral Health Assessment Form. Data pertaining to dietary habits and demographics was also collected. Descriptive and inferential statistics along with Pearsons correlation and Binary logistic regression were executed for the present study and level of significance was fixed at p<0.05.nnnRESULTSnCaries prevalence was 10.8% and 68.9% in permanent and primary dentitions, respectively. Mean Decayed, Missing And Filled Tooth (DMFT) index scores among study subjects were 0.21±0.72 and 3.08±3.11 for permanent and primary dentitions, respectively. Increase in caries prevalence was significantly associated with decrease in total FCQ scores. FCQ domains health, natural content and weight control were significantly correlated with dental caries experience. FCQ also showed significant correlation with socio-economic variables.nnnCONCLUSIONSnOverall, dental caries experience was found to be high. Parental food choice motives positively influenced dietary patterns and caries experience of their children. Caries experience was less in children whose parents reported higher scores on FCQ. Understanding the barriers, identification of risk factors for poor food choices and targeting interventions might formulate ways by which the desired behaviour can be achieved.

The SCARE 2018 Statement: Updating Consensus Surgical CAse REport (SCARE) Guidelines

INTRODUCTIONnThe SCARE Guidelines were published in 2016 to provide a structure for reporting surgical case reports. Since their publication, SCARE guidelines have been widely endorsed by authors, journal editors, and reviewers, and have helped to improve reporting transparency of case reports across a range of surgical specialties. In order to encourage further progress in reporting quality, the SCARE guidelines must themselves be kept up to date. We completed a Delphi consensus exercise to update the SCARE guidelines.nnnMETHODSnA Delphi consensus exercise was undertaken. All members of the previous Delphi group were invited to participate, in addition to researchers who have previously studied case reports, and editors from the International Journal of Surgery Case Reports. The expert group was sent an online questionnaire where they were asked to rate their agreement with proposed changes to each of the 24 items.nnnRESULTSn56 people agreed to participate and 45 (80%) invitees completed the survey which put forward modifications to the original guideline. The collated responses resulted in modifications. There was high agreement amongst the expert group.nnnCONCLUSIONnA modified and improved SCARE checklist is presented, after a Delphi consensus exercise was completed. The SCARE 2018 Statement: Updating Consensus Surgical CAse REport (SCARE) Guidelines.