OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to assess knowledge and awareness regarding needle stick and sharp injury among dental personnel and compared the knowledge and awareness level about needle stick injuries between dental professionals and dental supporting staff working at the School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted from March 2016 to March 2017. The total sample included 112 registered dental personnel including dental professionals (lecturers, dental officers, and postgraduate students) and dental supportive staff (including staff nurses and dental surgery assistant) who were selected from the School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia at Kelantan District of Malaysia. Data were collected by a structured questionnaire.
RESULTS: In our study 60.7% respondents answered correctly for all the statements regarding knowledge and 51.8% of the respondents answered correctly for the statements regarding awareness on needle stick and sharp injury. No significant difference of knowledge level has been observed between the dental professionals and dental supportive staff (p
AIM: The purpose of this study was to examine the attitudes and practices of endodontists and paediatric dentists regarding RET.
DESIGN: A survey was conducted among endodontists and paediatric dentists from 13 countries. A number of factors were evaluated, including frequency of RET application, followed guidelines, disinfection techniques, intracanal medication type, scaffold type, preferred coronal seal material, and follow-up period.
RESULTS: Among the 1394 respondents, 853 (61.2%) and 541 (38.8%) were endodontists and paediatric dentists, respectively. Almost half (43%) of participants have not performed RET yet. The American Association of Endodontics guideline (47.3%) was selected as the primary source for the clinical protocol. The most frequently selected irrigant solution was 1.5%-3% NaOCl at the first (26.1%) and second (13.6%) sessions. A blood clot (68.7%) and MTA (61.9%) were the most frequently selected scaffold type and coronal barrier. Most participants preferred a 6-month follow-up period.
CONCLUSION: According to this survey, deviations exist from current RET guidelines regarding all aspects evaluated. Standardizing clinical protocols and adhering to available guidelines would help to ensure more predictable outcomes.