Status of North American Graduate Programs in Periodontics Providing Laser Education and Clinical Training: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the status of laser use and training in the U.S. and Canadian graduate periodontology programs. A survey questionnaire was sent electronically to 55 periodontology program directors in North America. The questions focused on laser implementation, types of lasers used, for which procedures lasers were used, and level of education/clinical training provided to residents. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test. Twenty-two directors responded (40%). Most programs (86%) used lasers and 89% used a diode laser. Laser treatment was the most used for periimplantitis (84%). Fifteen programs (79%) provided didactic and clinical training, with 47% programs giving 4-12 h of didactic training. In 53% of programs, residents completed 4 to10 procedures. Only 29% of programs had residents who had received a certification in lasers, with most (80%) programs requiring between 1-9 cases for certification. Of the participants not providing laser training, the major barrier was indicated as being "expense", with 68.7% reporting plans to implement laser education. Conclusions: Most graduate periodontics programs were providing laser training and treatment. There was great variability regarding the training methods, specifically in number of dedicated laser courses, time allocated for laser training, and prerequisites for laser certification.

Virtual reality distraction for pain control during periodontal scaling and root planing procedures.

BACKGROUND: Although pain management during periodontal treatment usually is achieved with anesthesia, alternative methods are available. The authors conducted a study to evaluate the analgesic effect of immersive virtual reality (VR) during periodontal scaling and root planing (SRP) procedures. METHODS: The authors recruited 38 patients. They used a within-patient/split-mouth design. Patients received SRP under three treatment conditions in three quadrants. The three conditions were control, watching a movie and VR. After each SRP procedure, patients responded to questions about their discomfort and/or pain by using a visual analog scale (VAS) (range, 0 to 10 in which lower numbers indicate less pain or discomfort). The authors also recorded patients' blood pressure (BP) and pulse rate (PR). Patients were asked which of the three treatment modalities they preferred. RESULTS: The mean (+/- standard deviation) VAS scores for five questions pertaining to control, movie and VR were 3.95 +/- 2.1, 2.57 +/- 1.8 and 1.76 +/- 1.4, respectively. Paired t tests revealed that VAS scores were significantly lower during VR compared with the movie (P <.001) and control (P <.001) conditions. Similarly, BP and PR were lowest during VR, followed by the movie and control conditions. Patients reported that they preferred the VR condition. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that use of immersive VR distraction may be an effective method of pain control during SRP procedures. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Practitioners can use immersive VR distraction for pain control during SRP procedures.