Frequency of Post-Instrumentation Symptoms Using Hand Files Versus Rotary Protapers

Mirza, Asaad Javaid; Nazir, Mohsin; Javaid, Maaz Asad; Shafiq, Mohammad Khalid; Moosa, Rafique

doi:10.17140/doj-5-138

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 8 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to most countries, usage of rubber dam in Pakistan is scarcely practiced among general dentists and dental students. 6 This may be due to various reasons which include inadequate training during clinical years, application technique and time required, additional cost of equipment and materials 7,8 . It takes an average time of 4.28 minutes for general dental practitioners to place a rubber dam.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Patient Attitude towards Rubber dam use in Endodontic Treatment

Ahmed¹,

Bashir²,

Khan³

2021

PJMHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Rubber dam is an indispensable tool to isolate teeth during dental treatment, but its application can be disagreeable for some patients. Aim: to determine the patient’s attitude to rubber dam use during endodontic procedures. Methods: Cross-sectional study was carried out in Operative Dentistry, Lahore Medical and Dental College, from 31st August 2021 to 21st October 2021. Using convenience sampling, 130 proformas were dispersed amongst house officers and postgraduate residents, who were performing endodontics under rubber dam. Questionnaires consisting demographic information, participant’s previous and current experience of rubber dam use, the treating doctor, time taken to apply rubber dam and duration of procedure. 126 completed forms were returned. Chi-square test was done for proportionate variables to determine statistical significance. Results: 46 patients (36.5%) answered their current experience was better with rubber application, 41 (32.5%) said about the same experience as compared to their previous rubber dam experience, and 11 (8.7%) had a worse current experience. Current experience of rubber dam use was: (i) pleasant/comfortable= 56 (44.4%), and (ii) uncomfortable/painful= 70(55.6%). The results further demonstrated that middle aged patients were more receptive to reapplication of the dam for future endodontic use. Statistically significant finding was that the postgraduate trainees applied the dam faster. Conclusion: Patient acceptance increased as the operator became more experienced, in lieu, more efficient in rubber dam placement. MeSH words: Rubber Dams, Endodontics, Patient

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%