ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the dentists' knowledge about biosafety considering the SARS-CoV-2 and the risks of increasing the COVID-19 outbreak by dental practices during the pandemic in Brazil. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed by internet-based snowball sampling technique. A questionnaire with questions about different content was applied, and then analyzed the following two parameters: participants' Brazilian region and professional's specialty. Results: A total of 413 e-questionnaires from all Brazilian regions were considered valid. There were no significant differences among biosafety measures adopted by participants from different Brazilian regions (p≥0.05), except for those from North region, which have applied less previous oral antisepsis, temperature screening, and specific anamnesis tracking COVID-19 symptoms (p<0.05). The unique use of N95 mask was positively associated with North region (p<0.05). Expert participants of Groups 2 (oral surgery and correlate areas) and 4 (orthodontics, oral radiology and facial jaw orthopedics) were more updated than other ones (p<0.05). Conclusion: The biosafety protocols applied by participants were not adequate for the epidemiologic status of COVID-19 in each region of Brazil, from 13th May to 17th June 2020. Specialties linked to microbiology area or structured social networks have better applied preventive measures for COVID-19.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Containment of Biohazards , Infection Control, Dental , Dental Offices , Dentists , Personal Protective Equipment/microbiology , COVID-19 , Brazil/epidemiology , Chi-Square Distribution , Cross-Sectional Studies/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires , Data Interpretation, Statistical , Delivery of Health Care , N95 RespiratorsABSTRACT
Abstract Objective: To evaluate the best strategy for pacifier disinfection methods. Material and Methods: The literature search was conducted on MEDLINE/PubMed, Scielo, Lilacs, Web of Science, and Scopus databases to find all relevant articles published over the past 20 years, based on PRISMA guidelines. Two reviewers extracted data independently by using a standardized form. The following factors were recorded: country of study, type of study, pacifier material, sample number, microorganisms analyzed, decontamination methods used, method accessibility and results found. Results: A total of 121 articles were obtained from all databases. The selected documents underwent a final screening, resulting in 8 articles. The method of disinfection analyzed by the literature were: 3.5% neutral detergent, apple cider vinegar 70% spray, boiling water during 15 minutes, sodium hypochlorite 2.5, hydrogen peroxide 70% spray, chlorhexidine 0.12%, Brushtox®, sterile water and microwave. Conclusion: Because of the broad methods for pacifier disinfection and different levels of accessibility to disinfectant agents, the pacifier consensus for decontamination remains unclear. Although the disinfection methods are diverse, the methods suggested to its disinfection were identified and described in this article.