Addressing Antimicrobial Properties in Guided Tissue/Bone Regeneration Membrane: Enhancing Effectiveness in Periodontitis Treatment.

Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) and guided bone regeneration (GBR) are the two surgical techniques generally used for periodontitis disease treatment. These techniques are based on a barrier membrane to direct the growth of new bone and gingival tissue at sites with insufficient volumes or dimensions of bone or gingiva for proper function, esthetics, or prosthetic restoration. Numerous studies have highlighted biocompatibility, space-creation, cell-blocking, bioactivity, and proper handling as essential characteristics of a membrane's performance. Given that bacterial infection is the primary cause of periodontitis, we strongly believe that addressing the antimicrobial properties of these membranes is of utmost importance. Indeed, the absence of effective inhibition of periodontal pathogens has been recognized as a primary factor contributing to the failure of GTR/GBR membranes. Therefore, we suggest considering antimicrobial properties as one of the key factors in the design of GTR/GBR membranes. Antibiotics are potent medications frequently administered systemically to combat microbes and mitigate bacterial infections. Nevertheless, the excessive use of antibiotics has resulted in a surge in bacterial resistance. To overcome this challenge, alternative antibacterial substances have been developed. In this review, we explore the utilization of alternative substances with antimicrobial properties for topical application in membranes. The use of antibacterial nanoparticles, phytochemical compounds, and antimicrobial peptides in this context was investigated. By carefully selecting and integrating antimicrobial agents into GTR/GBR membranes, we can significantly enhance their effectiveness in combating periodontitis. These antibacterial substances not only act as barriers against pathogenic bacteria but also promote the process of periodontal healing.

The Relationship Between Nurse's Professional Quality of Life, Mindfulness, and Hardiness: A Cross-Sectional Study During the COVID-19 Outbreak.

Background: In the pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease, various factors, such as workplace factors, and psychological variables, can affect the occupational status of nurses. This study aimed to assess the relationship between nurses' professional quality of life, mindfulness, and hardiness during the outbreak of COVID-19. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 239 nurses from two medical centers in Rafsanjan, Iran. Quota sampling was performed from August to November 2020. A demographic form, the Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL), the Freiburg Mindfulness Questionnaire-Short Form (FMI-SF), and the Occupational Hardiness Questionnaire (OHQ) were used to collect data. Results: The mean age of the participants was 33.20 ± 6.85 years. The majority of the participants were female, married, and employed. Compassion Satisfaction (CS), Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS), and Burnout (BO) were all moderate among nurses. Hardiness was the best predictor of compassion satisfaction. Mindfulness was the best predictor of both secondary traumatic stress and burnout. Psychological hardiness and mindfulness had the greatest impact on nurses' quality of professional life during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: Caring for COVID-19 patients may lead to BO, CF, and STS; identifying predictors of these can inform the development of interventions to mitigate or minimize BO, CF, and STS in nurses caring for these patients. Furthermore, in order to improve nurses' quality of professional life, psychological hardiness, and mindfulness, necessary psychological programs and interventions should be designed and implemented.

Psychosocial status during the prevalence of COVID-19 disease: the comparison between healthcare workers and general population.

The prevalence of COVID-19 disease continues to be a significant psychosocial status among health care workers (HCWs) and the general population worldwide. This cross sectional study aimed to compare the psychosocial status between healthcare workers and general population during the prevalence of COVID-19 disease in southeast Iran. Totally 415 health care workers of a medical service center for COVID-19 patients and 1023 people of general population participated in the study. An online socio-demographic characteristics questionnaire, General Health Questionnaire (GHQ -28), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) were utilized to evaluate psychosocial status. According to GHQ, the psychological disorders of the HCWs were significantly higher than that of the general population (P < 0.001). According to GAD-7, no significant difference was found between general population and HCWs. Multivariate logistic analysis showed no difference between general population and HCWs in the psychological disorder. Although HCWs suffered from psychological disorders more than general population, nearly one third to half of the participants in both groups had psychosocial disorders.