Illinois Dental Anesthesia and Sedation Survey for 1996.
(1/194)
Dentists in the state of Illinois who possess a permit to administer sedation or general anesthesia were surveyed. A 71% response rate was achieved. Of the respondents, 86% held permits for deep sedation/general anesthesia and 14% held permits for parenteral conscious sedation. By practice specialty, 84% were oral and maxillofacial surgeons, 11% were general dentists, 5% were periodontists, and fewer than 1% were dental anesthesiologists. Advanced Cardiac Life Support training was possessed by 85% of the respondents. The most common anesthesia team configuration (82%) was a single operator-anesthetist and two additional assistants. Only 4% reported use of a nurse anesthetist, and 2% used an additional MD or DDS anesthesiologist. The vast majority (97%) of the practitioners do not intubate in the office on a routine basis. Supplemental oxygen was used by 81% of the respondents whenever intravenous agents were used. A total of 151,335 anesthetics were administered during the year. One mortality occurred in a patient with an undisclosed pre-existing cardiac condition. Four other events were reported that required medical intervention or hospital evaluation; however, no permanent injuries were reported. Other practice characteristics were described. (+info)
Infection control practices across Canada: do dentists follow the recommendations?
(2/194)
This study investigated provincial and territorial differences in dentists' compliance with recommended infection control practices in Canada (1995). Questionnaires were mailed to a stratified random sample of 6,444 dentists, of whom 66.4% responded. Weighted analyses included Pearson's chi-square test and multiple logistic regression. Significant provincial and territorial differences included testing for immune response after hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination, HBV vaccination for all clinical staff, use of infection control manuals and post-exposure protocols, biological monitoring of heat sterilizers, handwashing before treating patients, using gloves and changing them after each patient, heat-sterilizing handpieces between patients, and using masks and uniforms to protect against splatter of blood and saliva. Excellent compliance (compliance with a combination of 18 recommended infection control procedures) ranged from 0% to 10%; the best predictors were more hours of continuing education on infection control in the last two years, practice location in larger cities (> 500,000) and sex (female). Clearly, improvements in infection control are desirable for dentists in all provinces and territories. Extending mandatory continuing education initiatives to include infection control may promote better compliance with current recommendations. (+info)
Where is UK general dental practice going?
(3/194)
Dentistry is a fundamental part of healthcare; without it a large proportion of the population would suffer severe detriment to their general health. However, in order to achieve our professional aims we have to pursue the business of dentistry. (+info)
The occupational risk to dental anesthesiologists of acquiring 3 bloodborne pathogens.
(4/194)
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the occupational risk to dental anesthesiologists of contracting 3 bloodborne pathogens: hepatitis B (HBV), hepatitis C (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). METHODS: Through an anonymously returned, mailed questionnaire, dental anesthesiologists in Canada and the United States provided information regarding percutaneous and mucocutaneous contacts with contaminated fluid during the treatment of patients under deep sedation and general anesthesia as well as other general practice information. A mathematical model was applied to determine the occupational risk. RESULTS: Of the 101 (65%) returned questionnaires, 98 reported having treated patients within the previous 6 months. Of these, 41 (42%) had at least one percutaneous accident (89 accidents in total), and the projected mean annual injury rate for dental anesthesiologists overall was 1.82. The most common causes of injury were burs, intraoral needles, and dental instruments. Operator error during use was associated with 31% of reported accidents. Significantly more injuries were reported by those who also reported a mucocutaneous contact and by those working more than 25 hours per week. The projected mean annual number of mucocutaneous exposures was 0.88 for dental anesthesiologists overall. CONCLUSIONS: The calculated annual risk to the average dental anesthesiologist of acquiring HBV (if not immune), HCV, and HIV following percutaneous injury was very low for all infections (HBV the most; HIV the least). The risk of contracting HIV following mucocutaneous contact was extremely low. (+info)
Radiographic factors affecting the management of impacted upper permanent canines.
(5/194)
The aim of the investigation was to evaluate which radiographic factors influenced the orthodontists' decision whether to expose or remove an impacted upper permanent canine and was a retrospective, cross-sectional design. The sample consisted of all radiographic records of patients referred to the Orthodontic Department at Manchester University Dental Hospital with impacted upper permanent canines between 1994-1998 (n = 44). The following canine position measurements were made from the OPG: angulation to the midline, vertical height, antero-posterior position of the root, overlap of the adjacent incisor, and presence of root resorption of adjacent incisor(s). The labio-palatal position of the impacted canine was assessed from the lateral skull radiograph. Whether the impacted canine had been exposed and orthodontically aligned or removed was also recorded. Stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that the labio-palatal position of the crown influenced the treatment decision, with palatally positioned impacted canines more likely to be surgically exposed and those in the line of the arch, or labially situated, removed (P < 0.05). Additionally, as the canine angulation to the midline increased, the canine was more likely to be removed (P < 0.05). The orthodontists' decision to expose or remove an impacted upper permanent canine, based on radiographic information, seems to be primarily guided by two factors: labio-palatal crown position and angulation to the midline. (+info)
An audit of general dental practitioners' referral practice following the distribution of third molar guidelines.
(6/194)
Oral and maxillofacial surgery waiting lists are amongst the longest of any surgical specialty. The majority of patients on these waiting lists have been referred for removal of their third molars (wisdom teeth). With increasing pressure to reduce the size of both out-patient and surgical waiting lists, it is important to ensure that only those patients with a recognised clinical need are referred and accepted for treatment. In April 1998, local general dental practitioners were issued guidelines for the management of patients with impacted third molars. This paper describes an audit that assessed the impact of this intervention. The results suggest that referral guidelines are an effective means of changing general dental practitioners' referral practice and that, used along with other strategies, could be effective in reducing oral and maxillofacial surgery out-patient and surgical waiting lists. (+info)
Comparison of decisions regarding prophylactic removal of mandibular third molars in Sweden and Wales.
(7/194)
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that Swedish dentists schedule more mandibular third molars for prophylactic removal compared with UK dentists and oral surgeons. DESIGN: Clinical and radiographic information relating to a stratified sample of 36 disease-free mandibular third molars (equal distribution of males and females, patients' age, angular position and degree of impaction) was presented to 26 general dental practitioners (GDPs) and 10 oral surgeons in Sweden and 18 GDPs and 10 oral surgeons in Wales who were asked to decide whether or not the third molars should be removed. RESULTS: There was no evidence of any difference in mean number of molars scheduled for removal by the GDPs, but the Swedish oral surgeons scheduled significantly more third molars for removal than oral surgeons in Wales. CONCLUSION: The less interventionist approach among oral surgeons in the UK may reflect the development and application of authoritative guidelines in the UK and an extensive debate concerning appropriateness of prophylactic removal there. (+info)
The use of dental anxiety questionnaires: a survey of a group of UK dental practitioners.
(8/194)
AIM: To determine the frequency of use of dental anxiety assessment questionnaires and factors associated with their use in a group of UK dental practitioners. METHOD: A postal questionnaire to all 328 dentists whose names appear in the British Society for Behavioural Sciences in Dentistry Directory. Information collected for each practitioner included gender, year of qualification, type of practice in which anxious dental patients were treated, treatment used to manage anxious dental patients, type and frequency of use of dental anxiety assessment indices. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned from 275 (84%) practitioners. 269 were analyzed. Only 54 practitioners (20%) used adult dental anxiety assessment questionnaires and only 46 (17%) used child dental anxiety assessment questionnaires. Male practitioners were more likely to report questionnaire use in comparison with females (P< 0.05), when treating dentally anxious adults (26% v 14%). In addition, practitioners providing intravenous sedation were more likely to use an adult dental anxiety questionnaire (P < 0.04) than those who did not use intravenous sedation (29% v 15%). The type of treatment provided had a significant association with the use of child dental anxiety. Those providing general anaesthesia (P = 0.03) and hypnosis (P = 0.01) for dentally anxious children were more inclined to use a questionnaire. CONCLUSION: The use of pre-treatment dental anxiety assessment questionnaires was low in this group of dentists. Male practitioners and those providing intravenous sedation, general anaesthesia or hypnosis seem more likely to use dental anxiety assessment questionnaires. (+info)