RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Rubber dam is an important tool in dentistry-in the past as well as today. As a result of a lack of acceptance of the conventional system, introduced by Barnum in 1869, new systems were developed (eg, OptraDam® by Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein). This system was advertised as being very comfortable and easy to use, without distracting clamps. The aim of this study was to investigate if a new rubber dam system would be better accepted by patients and dentists than the conventional one. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients from the Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology received at least one treatment with the conventional rubber dam (Dental Dam, Coltène Whaledent, Langenau, Germany) and one with the new rubber dam (OptraDam®, Ivoclar Vivadent). Staff/students and patients were asked to complete questionnaires with regard to the advantages and disadvantages of the particular system after every treatment. RESULTS: Among patients, students, and dentists in the dental school environment there is a high degree of acceptance of rubber dam in general. During the study there were only very few situations in which neither of the systems could be used. The conventional rubber dam was preferred by all patients, students, and dentists (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our study confirms that there is a high degree of acceptance of the rubber dam when it is compulsory to use. The reasons for the refusal during the daily workload of a practice remain unclear, but appear to be independent of the material or design available. A new design does not necessarily imply better acceptance.
Asunto(s)
Dique de Goma/clasificación , Adolescente , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Actitud Frente a la Salud , Odontólogos/psicología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prioridad del Paciente , Dique de Goma/psicología , Estudiantes de Odontología/psicología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Adulto JovenAsunto(s)
Operatoria Dental , Recubrimiento de la Pulpa Dental/clasificación , Resinas Compuestas , Preparación de la Cavidad Dental , Restauración Dental Permanente , Recubrimientos Dentinarios , Fluoruros Tópicos/química , Recubrimiento de la Cavidad Dental/métodos , Cementos de Ionómero Vítreo , Selladores de Fosas y Fisuras , Dique de Goma/clasificación , Fracturas de los DientesRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to analyse the protein content of 17 commonly used rubber dams and to determine if they contained known allergenic proteins. METHODS: Proteins were eluted with buffer from 17 brands of commercially available rubber dams. The quantity of eluted protein was measured and expressed in micrograms in every gram of rubber. The molecular weights of the individual proteins eluted were then measured after resolution on sodium dodecyl sulphate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and compared with those of known allergens. RESULTS: The rubber dams were shown to contain significant amounts of protein (950-5850 micrograms). The subsequent analysis of these proteins using SDS-PAGE confirmed that some of these proteins were of the same molecular weight as known allergens. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study confirm that all the rubber dams tested contained significant amounts of protein. The molecular weights of these proteins correspond with those of known allergens, and they could, therefore, be a cause of hypersensitivity reactions to dental rubber dams.
