The diagnosis of neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders (NPDs) in primary care can suffer from inefficiencies resulting in misdiagnoses and delayed diagnosis, limiting effective treatment options. The development of speech and language-based profiling biomarkers could aid in achieving earlier motor diagnosis for PD for instance, or more accurate diagnosis of clinically similar or late presenting NPDs.

RHAPSODY aims to investigate the feasibility of the remote administration of a battery of speech tasks in eliciting continuous narrative speech across a range of NPDs. The project also aims to determine the feasibility of using acoustic and linguistic biomarkers from speech data to support the clinical assessment and disambiguation of common NPDs

All participants (n=250) will take part in a single virtual telemedicine video conference with a researcher in which they are screened and complete a battery of speech tasks, in addition to cohort-specific screening measures. Over the following month, participants will be asked to complete a series of short, self-administered speech assessments via a smartphone application.

The speech tasks will be audio-recorded and analysed on Novoic’s technology platform. Objectives will be analysed using measures including average length of speech elicitation for speech tasks, intra- and inter-subject variance, differences in linguistic patterns, and response rates to speech assessments.

The analyses could help to identify and validate speech-derived clinical biomarkers to support clinicians in detecting and disambiguating between NPDs with heterogeneous presentations. This should further support earlier intervention, improved treatment options and improved quality of life.

In terms of significant financial interest and relationships, it is emphasised that the private organisation Novoic, who aim to develop speech algorithms for diagnostic use, is the study’s sponsor and employees or former employees of this company comprise

To understand barriers and facilitators to evidence-based prescribing of antibiotics in the outpatient dental setting.

Semistructured interviews.

Outpatient dental setting.

Dentists from 40 Veterans’ Health Administration (VA) facilities across the United States.

Dentists were identified based on their prescribing patterns and were recruited to participate in a semistructured interview on perceptions toward prescribing. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and double-coded for analysis, with high reliability between coders. We identified general trends using the theoretical domains framework and mapped overarching themes onto the behavior change wheel to identify prospective interventions that improve evidence-based prescribing.

In total, 90 dentists participated in our study. The following barriers and facilitators to evidence-based prescribing emerged as impacts on a dentist’s decision making on prescribing an antibiotic: access to resources, social influence of peers and other care providers, clinical judgment, beliefs about consequences, local features of the clinic setting, and beliefs about capabilities.

Findings from this work reveal the need to increase awareness of up-to-date antibiotic prescribing behaviors in dentistry and may inform the best antimicrobial stewardship interventions to support dentists’ ongoing professional development and improve evidence-based prescribing.

To evaluate opportunities for assessing penicillin allergies among patients presenting to dental clinics.

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

VA dental clinics.

Adult patients with a documented penicillin allergy who received an antibiotic from a dentist between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, were included.

Chart reviews were completed on random samples of 100 patients who received a noncephalosporin antibiotic and 200 patients who received a cephalosporin. Each allergy was categorized by severity. These categories were used to determine patient eligibility for 3 testing groups based on peer-reviewed algorithms: (1) no testing, (2) skin testing, and (3) oral test-dose challenge. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were used to compare facility and patient demographics first between true penicillin allergy, pseudo penicillin allergy, and missing allergy documentation, and between those who received a cephalosporin and those who did not at the dental visit.

Overall, 19% lacked documentation of the nature of allergic reaction, 53% were eligible for skin testing, 27% were eligible for an oral test-dose challenge, and 1% were contraindicated from testing. Male patients and African American patients were less likely to receive a cephalosporin.

Most penicillin-allergic patients in the VA receiving an antibiotic from a dentist are eligible for penicillin skin testing or an oral penicillin challenge. Further research is needed to understand the role of dentists and dental clinics in assessing penicillin allergies.

Effective nasal reconstruction requires skin and soft tissue cover, cartilage or bone structure, and mucosal lining. Ideal lining is thin, pliable and vascularised, making reconstruction challenging. This paper presents the first case series with long-term outcomes of pericranial flaps used as inner lining for nasal reconstruction.

Patients undergoing paramedial forehead flaps from 2007 to 2019 were identified using second-stage nasal reconstruction billing codes. Patients with pericranial flaps for lining, for whom there were data on resulting outcomes and complications, were identified.

Sixty-six patients underwent second-stage nasal reconstruction. Eighteen patients had paramedian forehead and pericranial flaps for inner lining reconstruction. The flap lining had no immediate post-operative complications. Three patients suffered partial to major reconstructive failure post radiotherapy. Other complications included nasal stenosis and orocutaneous fistula.

Combined with paramedian forehead flaps, the pericranial flap is reliable as inner lining for nasal reconstruction. It is easily accessible and useful in resections with limited mucosal options.

While declarative learning is dependent on the hippocampus, procedural learning and repetition priming can operate independently from the hippocampus, making them potential targets for behavioral interventions that utilize non-declarative memory systems to compensate for the declarative learning deficits associated with hippocampal insult. Few studies have assessed procedural learning and repetition priming in individuals with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI).

This study offers an overview across declarative, conceptual repetition priming, and procedural learning tasks by providing between-group effect sizes and Bayes Factors (BFs) comparing individuals with aMCI and controls. Seventy-six individuals with aMCI and 83 cognitively unimpaired controls were assessed. We hypothesized to see the largest differences between individuals with aMCI and controls on declarative learning, followed by conceptual repetition priming, with the smallest differences on procedural learning.

Consistent with our hypotheses, we found large differences between groups with supporting BFs on declarative learning. For conceptual repetition priming, we found a small-to-moderate between-group effect size and a non-conclusive BF somewhat in favor of a difference between groups. We found more variable but overall trivial differences on procedural learning tasks, with inconclusive BFs, in line with expectations.

The current results suggest that conceptual repetition priming does not remain intact in individuals with aMCI while procedural learning may remain intact. While additional studies are needed, our results contribute to the evidence-base that suggests that procedural learning may remain spared in aMCI and helps inform behavioral interventions that aim to utilize procedural learning in this population.

To understand the transmission dynamics of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a hospital outbreak to inform infection control actions.

Retrospective cohort study.

General medical and elderly inpatient wards in a hospital in England.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients were classified as community or healthcare associated by time from admission to onset or positivity using European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control definitions. COVID-19 symptoms were classified as asymptomatic, nonrespiratory, or respiratory. Infectiousness was calculated from 2 days prior to 14 days after symptom onset or positive test. Cases were defined as healthcare-associated COVID-19 when infection was acquired from the wards under investigation. COVID-19 exposures were calculated based on symptoms and bed proximity to an infectious patient. Risk ratios and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were calculated from univariable and multivariable logistic regression.

Of 153 patients, 65 were COVID-19 patients and 45 of these were healthcare-associated cases. Exposure to a COVID-19 patient with respiratory symptoms was associated with healthcare-associated infection irrespective of proximity (aOR, 3.81; 95% CI, 1.6.3–8.87). Nonrespiratory exposure was only significant within 2.5 m (aOR, 5.21; 95% CI, 1.15–23.48). A small increase in risk ratio was observed for exposure to a respiratory patient for >1 day compared to 1 day from 2.04 (95% CI, 0.99–4.22) to 2.36 (95% CI, 1.44–3.88).

Respiratory exposure anywhere within a 4-bed bay was a risk, whereas nonrespiratory exposure required bed distance ≤2.5 m. Standard infection control measures required beds to be >2 m apart. Our findings suggest that this may be insufficient to stop SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We recommend improving cohorting and further studies into bed distance and transmission factors.

Impaired olfaction may be a biomarker for early Lewy body disease, but its value in mild cognitive impairment with Lewy bodies (MCI-LB) is unknown. We compared olfaction in MCI-LB with MCI due to Alzheimer’s disease (MCI-AD) and healthy older adults. We hypothesized that olfactory function would be worse in probable MCI-LB than in both MCI-AD and healthy comparison subjects (HC).

Cross-sectional study assessing olfaction using Sniffin’ Sticks 16 (SS-16) in MCI-LB, MCI-AD, and HC with longitudinal follow-up. Differences were adjusted for age, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used for discriminating MCI-LB from MCI-AD and HC.

Participants were recruited from Memory Services in the North East of England.

Thirty-eight probable MCI-LB, 33 MCI-AD, 19 possible MCI-LB, and 32HC.

Olfaction was assessed using SS-16 and a questionnaire.

Participants with probable MCI-LB had worse olfaction than both MCI-AD (age-adjusted mean difference (B) = 2.05, 95% CI: 0.62–3.49, p = 0.005) and HC (B = 3.96, 95% CI: 2.51–5.40, p < 0.001). The previously identified cutoff score for the SS-16 of ≤ 10 had 84% sensitivity for probable MCI-LB (95% CI: 69–94%), but 30% specificity versus MCI-AD. ROC analysis found a lower cutoff of ≤ 7 was better (63% sensitivity for MCI-LB, with 73% specificity vs MCI-AD and 97% vs HC). Asking about olfactory impairments was not useful in identifying them.

MCI-LB had worse olfaction than MCI-AD and normal aging. A lower cutoff score of ≤ 7 is required when using SS-16 in such patients. Olfactory testing may have value in identifying early LB disease in memory services.

The Harmonic Scalpel and Ligasure (Covidien) devices are commonly used in head and neck surgery. Parotidectomy is a complex and intricate surgery that requires careful dissection of the facial nerve. This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes in parotidectomy using these haemostatic devices with traditional scalpel and cautery.

A systematic review of the literature was performed with subsequent meta-analysis of seven studies that compared the use of haemostatic devices to traditional scalpel and cautery in parotidectomy. Outcome measures included: temporary facial paresis, operating time, intra-operative blood loss, post-operative drain output and length of hospital stay.

A total of 7 studies representing 675 patients were identified: 372 patients were treated with haemostatic devices, and 303 patients were treated with scalpel and cautery. Statistically significant outcomes favouring the use of haemostatic devices included operating time, intra-operative blood loss and post-operative drain output. Outcome measures that did not favour either treatment included facial nerve paresis and length of hospital stay.

Overall, haemostatic devices were found to reduce operating time, intra-operative blood loss and post-operative drain output.