RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The recent outbreak of coronavirus (COVID-19) caused a significant impact on dentistry. It is imperative to have sufficient knowledge of COVID-19 to manage patients in the dental operatory. AIM: To assess the knowledge and perceptions of dentists from different specialities about COVID-19 disease. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used a descriptive cross-sectional study design with a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire included three sets of 23 questions [Demographic-4; Source of information-1; Knowledge-10 and Perceptions-8]. The comparison of mean scores of knowledge and perceptions were interpreted based on the occupation of dental specialists. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The association between demographic variables and dental specialists' knowledge and perception scores was carried out using SPSS (Version IBM 21.0, NY, USA). RESULTS: A total of 429 dentists from various specialties participated in the present study. The study had obtained a overall good knowledge score (92.7%) with a mean value of 8.86 + 0.22, and a perception score (70.7%) with a mean value of 5.4+0.3. The present study reports a statistically significant difference between age (p=0.03) and knowledge source (p<0.05). The multi variate regression analysis showed that dentists' specialty had no significant effect on knowledge and perception. CONCLUSION: The study reports sufficient knowledge and perception scores. Oral maxillofacial surgeons showed higher knowledge scores, while prosthodontics and periodontics achieved good mean scores for perception on COVID-19. Social media and health authorities played an equally important role in the overall knowledge of the source of information related to COVID-19.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine is considered one of the options for the management of periodontal diseases. This present study was conducted to assess the usefulness of controlled-release chlorhexidine chip in addition to scaling and root planning (SRP) while comparing with SRP alone in the treatment of chronic periodontitis clinically, microbiologically and radiographically. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 20 patients age ranged from 30 to 55 years with chronic periodontitis. A total of 40 sites were selected. Two bilateral pockets with probing depth 4-6 mm were put in test and control groups in all subjects. SRP plus Periochip™ was used in the test group and SRP alone in the control group. In all subjects, all the analysis such as clinical parameters, the radiographic and anaerobic culture of P. gingivalis, T. denticola, and T. forsythia were performed and compared in both groups at baseline and 3 months interval. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in all clinical and radiographic parameters in the test group in comparison to control group. Total colony counts also reduced significantly. At baseline, Tf was recovered from 15 test group sites and 16 control group sites, Pg from 14 test group and 14 control group sites, Td from 16 test group and 15 control group sites. At 3 months, Tf was recovered from 4 test group and 10 control group sites, Pg from 3 test group and 9 control group sites, Td from 4 test group and 8 control group site. CONCLUSION: Periochip™ placement as an adjunct to SRP, showed promising results when compared to SRP alone. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Periochip is considered the best treatment option in the treatment of chronic periodontitis.
