Telediagnosis as an effective tool for assessment temporomandibular disorders.

BACKGROUND: The use of communication technologies has allowed a substantial improvement in telediagnosis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic agreement of synchronous teleconsultation compared to physical standard examination for temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and orofacial pain. METHODS: Sixty-one patients (50 women, 11 men) with a mean age of 46.07 years referred to the Orofacial Pain Ambulatory Service (SAMDOF -UFPR) were evaluated remotely. They were then examined in person by another evaluator, blinded for the first evaluation. Data on the experience and level of satisfaction with the teleconsultation were also collected. RESULTS: For each type and subtype of TMD, diagnostic agreement values, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values and negative predictive values were calculated with a 95% confidence interval. 'Almost perfect' agreement was found for Myalgia (k = 0.915), Arthralgia (k = 0.863), disc displacement without reduction without limited opening (k = 0.955) and no TMD (k = 1.00). 'Substantial' agreement for the subtypes headache attributed to TMD (k = 0.761), disc displacement without reduction with limited opening (k = 0.659) and subluxation (k = 7.82). The diagnoses of local myalgia (k = 0.573), myofascial pain with referral (k = 0.524) and disc displacement with reduction (k = 0.563) obtained 'moderate' agreement. Degenerative joint disease (k = 0.170) and disc displacement with reduction with intermittent locking (k = 0.000) obtained 'weak' and 'no agreement', respectively. More than 90% of the participants were satisfied and reported no discomfort during the assessment, agreeing to participate in another teleconsultation. CONCLUSION: Synchronous teleconsultation proved to be feasible and presented adequate diagnostic agreement for the main painful TMDs, especially for the diagnosis of myalgia and arthralgia. This format was also well accepted among patients.

The effects of the cognitive bias of unrealistic optimism in the adoption of preventive measures against COVID-19 in dentistry.

Introduction: The bias of unrealistic optimism is people's tendency to believe that they are less likely to experience negative events than others. Dental professionals are part of a high-risk group for COVID-19. Objectives: The objective of this study is to investigate whether unrealistic optimism bias, concern, and regret can affect the adoption of preventive measures by these professionals. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study of dentists recruited remotely by using an electronic form sent by email and social media. A five-point scale was used to identify whether unrealistic optimism, concern, and regret affected the adoption of preventive measures. The study included a total of 339 dentists. The group considered to be unrealistically optimistic accounted for 24.8% of the sample. Results: Unrealistic optimism negatively affected the use of protective equipment by dental professionals. Conversely, concern positively affected preventive measures. Conclusions: Although most dentists are realistic about the risk of infection compared with their peers, those with optimistic bias might be more susceptible to the disease, as they tend not to adopt recommended protective measures in the workplace. Future studies should also investigate ways of debiasing.