Fissure Sealants or Fluoride Varnish? A Randomized Pragmatic Split-Mouth Trial.

This study aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of resin-based fissure sealants (FS) and fluoride varnish (FV) in children at high caries risk. A practice-based split-mouth randomized clinical trial was conducted at 9 Public Dental Service (PDS) clinics in Norway. In total, 409 children age 6 to 10 y at high caries risk (d3mft > 0) meeting inclusion criteria were recruited by dentists and dental hygienists during routine examination. Eligibility criteria were 2 fully erupted first permanent molars (FPMs) in the same jaw, with sound occlusal surfaces or with initial caries. Participation was voluntary, caregivers and eligible children were informed about the study, and written parental consent was obtained. FS and FV were randomly applied on contralateral FPMs in the same jaw, with each participant serving as their own control. FS was applied at baseline and thereafter maintained according to clinicians' conventional procedures, whereas FV was applied at baseline, 6 mo, and 12 mo. The study outcome was success, with no need for invasive treatment (caries control), while failure was defined as dentin carious lesion or restoration. Two-level mixed-effects logistic regression analysis was used to compare FS and FV groups. Of 409 recruited children, 369 (90%) children/tooth pairs were examined after 36 mo. Intention-to-treat analysis showed 94.1% adjusted predicted probability (aPP) of success (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.7 to 96.4) in the FS group and 89.6% aPP (95% CI 86.5 to 92.7) in the FV group. In the adjusted analysis, the FV group had a lower OR for success compared with the FS group (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.87). In the population studied, the clinical effectiveness of FS was statistically significantly higher compared with FV but below the estimated minimal clinically important difference of 10%.

One year of COVID-19 in dental health services in Norway: psychological impact, risk perceptions and vaccination status.

BACKGROUND: Increased psychological pressure on oral healthcare professionals (OHP) due to COVID-19 has been shown, yet little is known about the long-term psychological impacts. We aimed to study the psychological impact of COVID-19 and associated factors including perceived risk and preparedness and vaccination status among OHP in the first year after the lockdown period in Norway. METHODS: A structured questionnaire sent electronically to dentists, dental hygienists and dental assistants inquired experiences and perceptions during the second year following the outbreak in Norway. The questionnaire comprised a COVID-19 fear scale and questions about risk perception, preparedness and vaccination status. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were used to assess psychological impact, perception of risk and preparedness according to vaccination status of the respondents. RESULTS: The majority of the 708 respondents were female (92.8%), had ten or more years of work experience (67.1%), and worked in public dental clinics (95.9%). Fears and concerns related to COVID-19 were common, 72.6% feared getting infected and 85.4% feared infecting others. Of the 642 respondents who agreed that their workplaces handled the situation well, 55.6% were fully vaccinated. Three factors were retrieved from EFA: Insecurity, Instability and Infection. SEM showed that females were more concerned with Infection, and respondents with long clinical experience were less likely to express fear about Instability. Fully vaccinated individuals felt more insecure about becoming infected, and those agreeing that their workplaces handled the current situation well were concerned with Insecurity. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread perception of adequate preparedness and high vaccine coverage, a considerable psychological impact and high levels of fear of COVID-19 were observed among the majority of OHP. Fully vaccinated individuals had a larger psychological burden than not fully vaccinated and those with unknown vaccination status. These findings can inform means and interventions to reduce negative impacts of fear in populations with a high psychological burden.

Psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on dental health personnel in Norway.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic put a pressure on all healthcare professionals and has affected the delivery of health care services globally. There is a need to understand the impact on different health care professionals in different countries. The aim of the present study was to explore the psychological impact of the pandemic among dental staff in Norway in relation to background characteristics, work situation and preparedness of the service. METHODS: A structured questionnaire sent electronically to dentists, dental hygienists and dental assistants inquired information about the lockdown period in Norway (13 March-17 April 2020). Distributions of background characteristics, perceptions of preparedness and psychological impact were calculated. Exploratory factor analysis was performed, and Structural Equation Models (SEMs) were used to compare psychological impact between dental professionals treating patients versus not during lockdown. RESULTS: Among the 1237 respondents, 58.8% worked clinically with patients. The majority were concerned of becoming infected (71.9%), of infecting others (85.4%) and/or of their family becoming infected (76.9%). Respondents who treated patients felt significantly more insecure about whether having become infected or not. The minority felt discriminated (6.7%), worried about death (11.7%), felt that life was threatening (9.8%) or felt loss of control of their lives (8.9%). More than 80% agreed that their workplace handled the situation well. Four factors were retrieved from the factor analysis. SEMs showed that gender and work experience had a significant effect on the factors Instability, Infection and Concerns. Respondents with work experience ≥10 years were less likely to express fear about Instability and Infection. Personnel reporting that their workplace had adequate equipment were also less concerned, however having adequate equipment did not reduce the factor Loss of control. CONCLUSION: The present study showed a considerable psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on dental personnel in Norway regardless of working clinically with patients or not. However, working with patients increased the insecurity about own infection status and of infecting people close to them. A safe working environment and adequate infection control measures are associated with less fear of infection and feeling of instability.