Aim:The objectives of this study are to evaluate the anxiety levels of patients toward dental treatment during the pandemic process, to obtain information about the level of awareness, perceptions and attitudes of patients seeking dental treatment and to determine the relationship between anxiety levels and socio-demographic variables of individuals. Material and Method: A total of 300 patients who applied to the dentistry faculty were included in the study, and a survey questionnaire was administered to these patients. The survey consisted of three parts; in the first part, the socio-demographic features of the patients were asked, in the second, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) developed by Spielberger was used to measure the level of anxiety, and in the last part, a questionnaire form about the perceived sensitivity to COVID-19 developed by the authors was applied. The statistical analysis of the data was performed with SPSS for Windows version 24.0 and a p value less than 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant. The normality of distribution of continuous variables was tested by the Shaphiro-Wilk test. The Mann Whitney U, Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn multiple comparison tests were used to compare non-normal data between two or more groups. Results: A total of 300 patients, 155 men and 145 women, participated in the study. The mean state anxiety score was 43.38±8.34. Significant differences were not found among the independent variables affecting the level of anxiety, age, gender, marital status, education, whether individuals have had COVID-19. When the questions evaluating the patients' perception on dental treatment were compared with the anxiety scores, there were statistically significant differences among groups. Conclusion:The study results revealed that the patients had a high level of anxiety in places such as dental hospitals where many patients are treated, but they were aware of the preventive measures to be taken during the pandemic process.
Objectives Aerosols formed during dental treatments have a huge risk for the spread of bacteria and viruses. This study is aimed at determining which part of the working area and at what size aerosol is formed and ensuring more effective use of HEPA-filtered devices. Materials and methods Anterior tooth preparation was performed by one dentist with one patient. Particle measurements were made using an airborne particle counter and were taken at four different locations: the chest of the patient, the chest of the dentist, the center of the room, and near the window. Three groups were determined for this study: group 1: measurement in a 24-h ventilated room (before the tooth preparation, empty room), group 2: measurement with the use of saliva ejector (SE), and group 3: measurement with the use of saliva ejector and HEPA-filtered extra-oral suction (HEOS) unit. ResultsThe particles generated during tooth preparation were separated according to their sizes; the concentration in different locations of the room and the efficiency of the HEOS unit were examined. Conclusions The present study showed that as the particle size increases, the rate of spread away from the dentist's working area decreases. The HEPA-filtered extra-oral suction unit is more effective on particles smaller than 0.5 microns. Therefore, infection control methods should be arranged according to these results. Clinical relevance The effective and accurate use of HEPA-filtered devices in clinics significantly reduces the spread of bacterial and viral infections and cross-infection.
Background/Aim: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of mechanical and chemical denture cleansing methods on dental attachments of varying retention with a scanning electron microscope. Material and Methods: An implant analog and a male part of a dental attachment were embedded into an acrylic block, and an abutment was screwed onto the analog. Different locator attachments with varying retention were tested using different denture cleansing methods and tap water for a time simulating 12 months of clinical use. A pull-out test was performed for each attachment, followed by analysis of the samples with a scanning electron microscope. Results: For the blue attachment group, there was no statistically significant difference between the retention values of control and chemical and mechanical denture cleansing groups (p>0.05). The clear and pink attachments were affected by chemical and mechanical denture cleansing, and had significantly decreased retention values compared to the control group (p<0.05). For both types of attachments, the mechanical cleansing group exhibited the lowest retention loss value. Scanning electron microscopy results showed that surface irregularities, scratch lines, and deformations were detected in chemical and mechanical denture cleansing groups for all types of retentive attachments. Conclusions: Both attachment systems with different retentions were influenced by the denture cleansing method. Considering the results, clinicians could recommend the most appropriate method to patients, one that does not adversely affect the properties of the retainer parts. Clinicians should not advise using mechanical and chemical denture cleansing methods to protect the long-term retention of pink and clear attachments.
Objectives: Aerosols formed during dental treatments have a great risk for the spread of bacteria and viruses. The aim of this study is to determine in which part of the working area and at what size aerosol is formed and to ensure more effective use of HEPA-filtered devices. Materials and Methods: Anterior tooth preparation was performed by one dentist with one patient. Particle measurements were made using an airborne particle counter and were taken at four different locations; chest of patient, chest of dentist, center of the room and near the window. Three groups were determined for the study; Group 1: measurement in a 24-hour ventilated room (before the tooth preparation, empty room), Group 2: measurement with the use of saliva ejector (SE), Group 3: measurement with the use of saliva ejector and HEPA-filtered extra oral suction (HEOS) unit.Results: The particles generated during tooth preparation were separated according to their sizes, the concentration in different locations of the room and the efficiency of the HEOS unit was examined.Conclusions: The present study showed that as the particle size increases, the rate of spread away from the dentist working area decreases. Hepa-filtered extra oral suction unit is more effective on particles smaller than 0.5 micron. Therefore, infection control methods should be arranged according to these results.Clinical Relevance: The effective and accurate use of HEPA-filtered devices in clinics significantly reduces the spread of bacterial and viral infections and cross-infection.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.