Delaying Intraoral Radiographs during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Conundrum.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has made dentists very assiduous about cross-infection during dental treatment, thereby delaying dental radiographs for treatment. However, patients needing dental emergency treatment in the ongoing pandemic require relevant intra/extraoral dental radiography for adequate diagnosis and treatment planning. METHODS: This article is aimed at adding to the hot debate: Is delay for intraoral radiographs justified or a possible proxy? As a narrative review, it provides an insight into the reasons for delaying intra-oral dental radiographs during in the pandemic and options of the nontraditional radiographic techniques available until the pandemic subsides. Discussion and Conclusion. Cross-contamination concerns through respiratory droplets grow while using intraoral film holders that stimulate gag reflex, coughing, saliva secretion, and if proper disinfection protocols are not applied. Since the patients' acquiring emergency dental treatment cannot be neglected, the return-to-work guidelines by the health regulatory bodies urge to prioritize extraoral radiographic imaging techniques to curb the infection, offering the best diagnostic efficacy. The dental professionals can consider cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and sectional dental panoramic radiographs (SDPRs), followed by a risk assessment for COVID-19, a safer modality in reducing cross-contamination and assuring an innocuous environment for both patient and coworkers.

Dental Radiographs for Age Estimation in US Asylum Seekers: Methodological, Ethical, and Health Issues.

Unaccompanied migrant children seeking asylum status in the United States are often forced to undergo dental radiographs, or x-rays, to verify that they are younger than 18 years.The application of third molar dental radiographs is methodologically flawed and should not be employed as a determinant of chronological age. Furthermore, the use of such tests without obtaining informed consent from either the youth or an objective advocate is unethical.Finally, the legal and health consequences of these inappropriately applied tests are severe and jeopardize the safety and security of these vulnerable minors.