Eye care habits of dentists registered in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the current eyecare behaviour of dentists and compare this against published standards concerning frequency of sight test intervals and eye protection. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Four hundred dentists were selected at random for inclusion in the study from the UK 2004 Dentists Register. They were invited to complete a questionnaire that ascertained their gender and age, current eyesight status and method of correction, elapsed time interval since their last eyesight test and reason for attendance. In addition, the use and power of magnification was sought along with the adoption of protective eyewear. Responses were coded and placed in a relational database to facilitate interrogation and subsequent statistical analysis. RESULTS: The questionnaire return rate was 63% (247 and allowing for the seven questionnaires returned marked unknown at this address). Of these 158 were males and 81 female. The majority worked in general dental practice. Those with known eyesight deficiencies were statistically more likely (p < 0.01) to attend for routine eye examination. Sixteen percent of respondents failed to attend for routine eye examination at least every two years. The mean age of those who had detected a change in their eyesight and sought examination was 43.59 (SD = 10.57) for males and 39.07 years (SD = 9.41) for females. This mirrored closely the mean age when the use of magnification was adopted (males = 42.39 (10.30), females = 40.33 (10.55)). The use of magnification was not universally adopted. Eye protection compliance was a low as 57% when using laboratory cutting equipment. CONCLUSIONS: Although compliance with accepted recommendations for biannual eyesight testing was higher than that for the general population, not all dentists complied. The adoption of protective eyewear was patchy and exposed dentists to unnecessary risk.

Accuracy and reproducibility of conventional radiographic assessment and subtraction radiography in detecting demineralization in occlusal surfaces.

Subjective interpretation of paired digital radiographic images viewed side by side to assess occlusal lesion progression, arrest or remineralization is difficult. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and reproducibility of a digital subtraction radiography technique and visual assessment of paired digital images in detecting changes in mineral content within occlusal cavities. Forty molar teeth with occlusal cavities were placed in arches and baseline digital radiographs taken. Nineteen teeth were randomly selected and had acid placed in the cavities and digital images taken after 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 h of acid exposure. Paired baseline images and those taken at the various time intervals were examined side by side and assessed for demineralization by five examiners. Subtraction images prepared from the paired images were assessed in the same way. One fifth of the images were re-examined to determine intra-examiner reproducibility. After 12 h or longer the diagnostic accuracy (mean area under the ROC curve = 0.92-0.98 for subtraction radiography), intra-examiner and inter-examiner reproducibility for detection of demineralization from the subtraction images was significantly better than viewing the paired images side by side (p < 0.01). The subtraction radiography system used was found to be more accurate and reproducible than visual assessment of paired digital images. As such the technique shows promise for monitoring occlusal lesion progression in clinical studies.

Chlorhexidine-modified glass ionomer for band cementation? An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the mean retentive strength, predominant site of band failure, amount of cement remaining on the tooth at deband and survival time of orthodontic micro-etched bands cemented with chlorhexidine-modified (CHXGIC) or conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC). DESIGN: In vitro study. SETTING: Dental Materials Laboratory. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred-and-twenty intact, caries-free third molars were collected from patients attending for third molar surgery. These were stored for 3 months in distilled water and decontaminated in 0.5% chloramine. To assess retentive strength, 80 teeth were randomly selected and 40 were banded with each cement. Testing was undertaken using a Nene M3000 testing machine at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min. Following debanding, the predominant site of failure was recorded as cement-enamel or cement-band interface. The amount of cement remaining on the tooth surface following deband was assessed and coded. Survival time for another 40 banded specimens, 20 cemented with each cement, was assessed following application of mechanical stress in a ball mill. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Retentive strength, predominant site of failure, amount of cement remaining on the tooth surface, survival time. RESULTS: Mean retentive strength for bands cemented with CHXGIC (0.32 MPa, SD 0.09) or GIC (0.28 MPa, SD 0.07) did not differ significantly (p=0.05). All bands failed at the enamel-cement interface. There was no significant difference in the amount of cement remaining on the tooth surface after deband for each cement type (p=0.23). The mean survival time of bands cemented with CHXGIC or GIC was 7.0 and 6.4 hours, respectively (p=0.23). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in mean retentive strength, amount of cement remaining on the tooth after deband or mean survival time of bands cemented with CHXGIC or GIC. Bands cemented with either cement failed predominantly at the enamel-cement interface. The results suggest that CHXGIC may have comparable clinical performance to GIC for band cementation.