Background:This systematic review used the Copenhagen (CBI) and the Maslach (MBI) Burnout Inventories and its scales to assess and compare studies that involved students and workers in all medical specialties. Material/Methods: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Wiley Library, and Web of Science databases were searched using keywords and Medical Subject Headings. Identified studies were in English, published between 2008 and 2022, measured the burnout of healthcare workers and students by using CBI and MBI, and observed adverse patient outcomes. Results:A total of 38 studies were included in the current review. All included studies assessed and evaluated subjects and participants by observing clinical measures, personal and demographic data, countries where the study was conducted, and study type used. Fifty percent of CBI papers were conducted in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries, whereas the majority of MBI papers (10) were conducted in Europe, followed by 9 studies conducted in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries and 6 studies conducted in the USA and Canada. The overall percentage of burnout in CBI studies (53%) was higher than that in MBI studies (35%). Also, the types and domains in CBI were marginally higher than those in MBI. Conclusions:Studies that used CBI scales recorded higher burnout compared with studies that used MBI. Females, higher education levels, and marriage status of the tested subjects showed higher CBI and MBI scale scores in comparison to their counterparts. Higher significant differences percentages in burnout types and genders were recorded in CBI than in MBI.

The root morphology and canal configuration (RMCC) of mandibular and maxillary canines among Saudi population is systematically reviewed and compared with international studies in this research. Methods: This study was carried out following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. The electronic databases of PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Wiley Library, Google website search, and Web of Science were searched. Only local and international cross-sectional, comparative, evaluation, and validation studies or case reports published between 2016 and 2022 that directly evaluated canine RMCC and assessed participants using cone beam computed tomography were included. Results: Forty-three studies that investigated RMCCs (17 local and 26 international) were involved in this review. The original Saudi research recorded that almost 100% of maxillary canines had one root and one canal, whereas 98.4% and 94.1% had one root and one canal in the mandibular arch. Vertucci's class I had the highest percentages in the maxillary and mandibular arches at 98.3% and 95.8%, respectively, followed by class III with 0.7% and 1.9% for the same arches, respectively. International studies recorded that 100% of maxillary canines had one canal and root; the percentages of the mandibular arch were 92.3 and 98% for single canal and root, respectively; and the highest percentage was obtained by Vertucci's class I (91.1%), followed by class III (4.7%). Conclusion:This review reports and confirmed the symmetry of the RMCCs of maxillary and mandibular canines between Saudi studies and other populations. Moreover, Vertucci's classes I and III were the most frequent RMCCs, and two-rooted canines in both arches were considerably less frequently than single-rooted ones.

Background In this questionnaire-based study, we evaluated the prevalence and awareness level of occupational hazards among dental professionals (students, interns, dentists, and specialists) at different dentistry colleges. Materials/Methods A self-administered questionnaire was designed from previously conducted studies and distributed to 310 participants from different dental colleges of dentistry in Sana’a City, Yemen. The questionnaire was divided into 4 parts. The first part comprised questions involving sex, age, and clinical professions; the second part, questions on awareness about different occupational hazards; the third part, questions about prevalence of occupational hazards; and the fourth part, questions related to bringing down the prevalence of occupational hazards associated with a dental practice. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and chi-square tests. Results Significant differences were detected between sex, age groups, and clinical professions. Musculoskeletal disorders were the most common physical hazard, whereas infections were the greatest biological hazard, accounting for 68% and 74%, respectively. Of the participants, 63.5% answered that “patient, practice, and finance” together were the most common causes of stress among practicing dentists and dental students. The use of gloves and/or masks was the most efficient preventive measure among participants. A significant difference was found among most of the parameters, with P ≤0.001. Almost 50% of respondents answered “yes” in relation to vaccination for hepatitis-B, with P =0.062. Conclusions The prevalence of occupational hazards was low among dentists and dental students among the tested participants, with significant differences for most of the parameters.