Impact of a virtual educational intervention on knowledge and awareness of biomedical waste management among Peruvian dental professionals.

Waste from healthcare is a significant global issue, with around 85% of it being common waste and the remaining 15% being hazardous waste that is infectious and toxic. Dentistry uses various materials that create a substantial amount of biomedical waste capable of impacting the environment. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the effects of a virtual educational program on the knowledge and awareness of dental material recycling and reuse, as well as biomedical waste management, among dental professionals in Peru. The current study was a longitudinal and quasi-experimental evaluation of 165 dentists from Peru. A validated questionnaire consisting of 30 items was administered at three different intervals (pre-test, immediate post-test, and 14-day post-test). Statistical analysis was conducted using the Mann Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis H tests to compare scores between categories of each sociodemographic variable, and the Cochrane's Q and Friedman test was used for related measures comparison. A significance level of p < 0.05 was considered. When comparing the percentage of correct responses regarding recycling and reuse of dental materials and biomedical waste management between the pre-test and the immediate post-test, a significant improvement in knowledge was observed for most of the questionnaire items (p < 0.05). At 14 days after the test, those who studied at a private university, unmarried, bachelors, non-specialists, non-teachers and have less than 10 years of professional experience did not did not retain knowledge on biomedical waste management (p < 0.05) or recycling and reusing dental materials (p < 0.05) to a significant extent. There was a significant enhancement in dentists' knowledge and awareness of managing biomedical waste, recycling, and reusing dental materials following the educational intervention. This improvement was observed across all sociodemographic variables considered in the study. However, this knowledge was not retained beyond two weeks for those who studied at a private university, unmarried, bachelor, with no specialty, non-teachers and with less than 10 years of professional experience. Government authorities should encourage oral health professionals to conduct research with educational interventions focused on improving and evaluating the sustainability and environmental impact of dental practices. This will enable professionals to better understand, control and evaluate the consequences of their practical work.

Colgajo de reposición coronal, con y sin injerto de tejido conectivo, para tratar recesiones gingivales / Coronally repositioned flap with and without connective tissue graft to treat gingival recession

Introducción: Las recesiones gingivales son afecciones de las encías, que son muy frecuentes y podrían provocar repercusiones estéticas, hipersensibilidad dentinaria y tener más tendencia a la formación de lesiones cervicales. Es necesario recubrir la superficie radicular mediante técnicas regenerativas periodontales. Objetivo: Comparar la cantidad de recubrimiento radicular, la profundidad al sondaje y el nivel de inserción clínica, empleando las técnicas de colgajo de reposición coronal, con y sin injerto de tejido conectivo, en pacientes con recesiones gingivales Miller I y II. Métodos: Se incluyeron un total de 16 pacientes con recesiones gingivales Miller clase I y II, de los cuales se seleccionaron 50 piezas dentarias tratadas quirúrgicamente para cubrir las recesiones. Se utilizaron las técnicas de colgajo de reposición coronal, con y sin injerto de tejido conectivo. Las mediciones clínicas fueron comparadas al inicio y a los tres meses posoperatorios. Resultados: Al tercer mes poscirugía los resultados del recubrimiento radicular, profundidad al sondaje y el nivel de inserción clínica para la técnica colgajo de reposición coronal con injerto de tejido conectivo, fueron 0,96 ± 1,33; 0,87 ± 0,63; 1,83 ± 1,7 y para la técnica colgajo de reposición coronal fueron 1,44 ± 1,19; 1,04 ± 0,52; 2,48 ± 1,48, respectivamente. Al comparar el recubrimiento radicular intergrupo no se encontraron diferencias significativas (p = 0,11). Sin embargo, al comparar la profundidad al sondaje intergrupo (p = 0,04), el nivel de inserción clínica intergrupo (p = 0,001) y todas las mediciones clínicas intragrupo (p = 0,001), se encontraron diferencias significativas. Conclusiones: La técnica de colgajo de reposición coronal, con y sin injerto de tejido conectivo, demostró diferencias significativas en la profundidad al sondaje y el nivel de inserción clínica en recesiones gingivales Miller I y II. No se alcanzaron diferencias significativas para el recubrimiento radicular en ambas técnicas a los 3 meses de seguimiento(AU)

Introduction: Gingival recession is a very common gum condition which may result in aesthetic alterations and dentin hypersensitivity, and increase the probability of cervical lesions. It is necessary to cover the root surface using periodontal regeneration techniques. Objective: Compare the amount of root coverage, probing depth and clinical insertion level, using coronally repositioned flap techniques with and without connective tissue graft in patients with Miller I and II gingival recessions. Methods: A total 16 patients with Miller class I and II gingival recessions were included in the study, from whom 50 teeth were selected which had been treated surgically to cover the recessions. The techniques used were coronally repositioned flap with and without connective tissue graft. Clinical measurements were compared at the start of the postoperative period and three months later. Results: Three months after surgery, root coverage, probing depth and clinical insertion level were 0.96 ± 1.33; 0.87 ± 0.63; 1.83 ± 1.7, respectively, for coronally repositioned flap with connective tissue graft, and 1.44 ± 1.19; 1.04 ± 0.52; 2.48 ± 1.48, respectively, for coronally repositioned flap. Root coverage intergroup comparison did not find any significant differences (p = 0.11). However, intergroup comparison of probing depth (p = 0.04) and clinical insertion level (p = 0.001), and all the intragroup clinical measurements (p = 0.001) did find significant differences. Conclusions: Coronally repositioned flap technique with and without connective tissue graft showed significant differences in terms of probing depth and clinical insertion level in Miller I and II gingival recessions. At three months' follow-up, no root coverage significant differences were observed for either technique(AU)