Aim The level of preparedness of the healthcare system plays an important role in management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). This study attempted to devise a comprehensive protocol regarding dental care during the COVID‐19 outbreak. Methods and result Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar were searched until March 2020 for relevant papers. Sixteen English papers were enrolled to answer questions about procedures that are allowed to perform during the COVID‐19 outbreak, patients who are in priority to receive dental care services, the conditions and necessities for patient admission, waiting room and operatory room, and personal protective equipment (PPE) that is necessary for dental clinicians and the office staff. Conclusion Dental treatment should be limited to patients with urgent or emergency situation. By screening questionnaires for COVID‐19, patients are divided into three groups of (a) apparently healthy, (b) suspected for COVID‐19, and (c) confirmed for COVID‐19. Separate waiting and operating rooms should be assigned to each group of patients to minimize the risk of disease transmission. All groups should be treated with the same protective measures with regard to PPE for the dental clinicians and staff.

Purpose To assess the effect of tooth preparation design on fracture resistance of zirconia‐reinforced lithium silicate overlays. Materials and Methods This study evaluated 50 human maxillary first molars with no caries, restorations or anatomical defects. The teeth were randomly divided into five groups (n = 10/group) based on preparation design for the fabrication of overlay restorations: (O) anatomical occlusal reduction, (OS) anatomical occlusal reduction with round shoulder preparation, (OG) anatomical occlusal reduction with a central groove, (OSG) anatomical occlusal reduction with round shoulder preparation and central groove, and (C) no preparation of tooth (control group). All restorations were fabricated using zirconia‐reinforced lithium silicate (Vita Suprinity). The specimens underwent thermomechanical fatigue loading in a masticatory simulator (1.2 million cycles at 98 N). Fracture resistance was measured using a universal testing machine. The mode of failure was determined as well. Data were analyzed using one‐way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post‐hoc test, paired t‐test and Fisher's exact test (α = 0.05). Results Group O showed significantly higher fracture resistance than groups OG and OSG (p = 0.002 and p = 0.001, respectively). The fracture resistance of group OS was significantly higher than that of group OSG (p = 0.008). The fracture resistance of the control group was significantly higher than that of OG and OSG (p = 0.001) and had no significant difference with other groups. Conclusions Group O (anatomical occlusal reduction alone), which had the most conservative preparation design, yielded the highest fracture resistance.

Introduction: Polyether ether ketone (PEEK) has low surface energy and high resistance to chemical surface treatments. Therefore, different surface treatments such as laser conditioning should be investigated. There is a gap of information regarding the efficacy of laser irradiation in the surface treatment of PEEK, and the efficacy of several laser types needs to be evaluated for this purpose. This study aimed to assess the effect of surface treatment with erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) and carbon dioxide (CO2) lasers on shear bond strength (SBS) of PEEK to composite resin veneers. Methods: In this experimental study, 60 rectangular-shaped PEEK samples (7 x 7 x 2 mm) were used. The samples were mounted in auto-polymerizing acrylic resin in such a way that only one surface measuring 7x7 mm remained exposed. The samples were then randomly divided into 3 groups (n=20) of control, Er:YAG laser surface treatment (Power=1.5 W, energy density=119.42 J/cm2 , irradiation time=20 s) and CO2 laser surface treatment (Power=4 W, energy density=159.22 J/cm2 , irradiation time=50 s). The bonding agent and PEEK opaque were applied on the surface of samples and they were veneered with a composite resin using a hollow plastic cylinder with an internal diameter of 4 mm. The SBS was then measured and the data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, Tukey HSD test and Dunnett’s test at 0.05 level of significance. Results: The SBS of the 3 groups was significantly different (P<0.001). The Tukey HSD test revealed that the Er:YAG laser had higher SBS than the CO2 laser group (P<0.001). The Dunnett’s test showed that both Er:YAG and CO2 laser groups yielded higher SBS than the control group (P<0.001). Conclusion: The Er:YAG and CO2 laser treatments can increase the SBS of PEEK to composite resin veneers, although the Er:YAG laser seems to be more effective for this purpose.

No abstract

No abstract