RESUMEN
Background and Objectives: The study aims to evaluate the pain efficacy of EMLA versus ice in palatine nerve blocks undergoing extraction. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized study, single-blind, split-mouth study carried out on a total of 20 healthy individuals needing extraction of bilateral maxillary teeth under local anesthesia referred to our department in the university from March 2021 to April 2022. Patients were randomly categorized into two groups: Group E (5% EMLA) and Group I (ice application), with 20 operative sites, respectively. In the study, the VAS-pain and satisfaction score and SEM score were analyzed. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 20.0 software using the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Study results showed that 13 patients were men and 7 were women whose ages ranged from 46 ± 18 years. Statistical analysis of pain on the VAS scale showed that the mean score for Group E and Group I were 2.3 ± 0.47 and 3.2 ± 0.41(mean ± SD), respectively, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). On the statistical analysis of the SEM scale for Group E and Group I, the mean score was 1.00 ± 0.00 and 1.25 ± 0.44426 (mean ± SD), respectively, which was statistically significant (P < 0.018). Conclusion: EMLA and ice were both good topical anesthetics each with advantages and disadvantages in clinical use. Each clinician needs to weigh the pros and cons of the different available methods and expenses to determine what type of anesthetic to use for each particular case during treatment.
RESUMEN
Objective: Mask usage and hand hygiene are the pillars of defense against the novel pathogen causing COVID-19. This study was conducted to compare these practices among healthcare workers (HCWs) and nonhealthcare workers (nonHCWs) and to examine the outlook toward the healthcare sector among the two. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey (via Google forms) using snowball sampling was conducted. Appropriate ethical clearance was taken from the Institutional Ethical Committee (IEC). HCWs and nonHCWs 18 years of age or older with basic literacy in English and with internet access were included. Results: There were 404 total respondents (M:F ratio: 0.87:1; mean age: 30.16±9.63 years). Among the respondents, 63.3 percent were HCWs while 35.6 percent were nonHCWs. Persons performing hand hygiene more than10 times/day were found to be almost three times more likely to develop skin dryness (odds ratio [OR]: 2.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.372, 6.362). Female participants were found to be 2.5 times more likely to develop dryness (odds ratio: 2.594, 95% CI: 1.590, 4.234). Use of gloves was found to be a protective factor against development of dryness (odds ratio: 0.485,95% CI: 0.287, 0.818). A statistically significant correlation was found between mask acne and female respondents (p-value=0.000), HCWs (p-value=0.000), and use of N95 mask in combination with surgical mask (p-value=0.04). Limitations: Being an online survey, responses could not be captured from people with limited internet access and of lower socio-economic strata. Conclusion: There is a considerable burden of preventive measures on HCWs and nonHCWs alike. Significant dermatological implications are seen with frequent hand hygiene and mask usage.
