The Experts below are selected from a list of 6399 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Alzate Sánchez Alberto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Niveles auditivos de una cohorte de estudiantes de odontología expuestos a ruido ambiental durante la formación práctica
'Universidad Libre', 2019Co-Authors: Botero Henao Diego, Alzate Sánchez AlbertoAbstract:Dentistry students are exposed to various risks. The environmental noise caused by Dental Equipment during practical training is one of them. Over time, it can trigger a decrease in hearing ability. O: To determine the hearing levels of a career of dentistry students exposed to environmental noise during practical training, compared with phonoaudiology students, followed in 2015. M: A test of dentistry students and students of another program was conducted. 63 of dentistry and 125 of the other program were evaluated. Signed informed consent was made otoscopy, tympanometry and an audiometry in January 2015 before starting clinical surgery, in June and October. R: The incidenceof hearing loss was presented in the Dental students was 23%, the average environmental noise measured during this study of hearing loss was presented in the Dental students in the three cuts was 91.3 dB exceeding the permissible limit according to OPS. There is a relationship between the hearing level of the dentistry student and the environmental noise characteristic of clinical and preclinical practices (p = 0.003). No Dental student uses a type of acoustic protection while performing clinical practices. C: The Relative Risk of mild hearing loss that is exposed to environmental noise typical of clinical practices in dentistry 2.97 times more than that which is not exposed to noise.Los estudiantes de odontología se encuentran expuestos a diversos riesgos, uno de ellos es el ruido ambiental causado por equipos odontológicos durante la formación práctica. O: Determinar los niveles de audición de una cohorte de estudiantes de odontología expuestos a ruido ambiental durante la formación práctica, comparados con estudiantes de fonoaudiología, seguidos en el año 2015. M: Se realizó en una cohorte de estudiantes de odontología y estudiantes de otro programa, se evaluaron 63 de odontología y 125 del otro programa. Firmado el consentimiento informado se realizó otoscopía, timpanometría y una audiometría en enero 2015 antes de iniciar las prácticas clínicas, en junio y en octubre. R: La incidencia de hipoacusia leve presentada en los estudiantes de odontología fue del 23%, el promedio de ruido ambiental medido durante este estudio en los tres cortes realizados fue de 91,3 dB superando el límite permisible de acuerdo con la Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Existe relación entre el nivel de audición del estudiante de odontología y el ruido ambiental propio de las prácticas clínicas y preclínicas (p=0,003). Ningún estudiante de odontología usa algún tipo de protección acústica mientras realizó las prácticas clínicas. C: El riesgo relativo de presentar hipoacusia leve estando expuesto al ruido ambiental propio de las prácticas clínicas en odontología es 2,97 veces más del que no está expuesto al ruido
-
Niveles auditivos de una cohorte de estudiantes de odontología expuestos a ruido ambiental durante la formación práctica
2018Co-Authors: Botero Henao, Diego Fernando, Alzate Sánchez AlbertoAbstract:ABSTRACT 1: Dentistry students are exposed to various risks. The environmental noise caused by Dental Equipment during practical training is one of them. Over time, it can trigger a decrease in hearing ability O: To determine the hearing levels of a career of dentistry students exposed to environmental noise during practical training compared with phonoaudiology students, followed in 2015. M: A test of dentistry students and students of another program was conducted. 63 of dentistry and 125 of the other program were evaluated. Signed informed consent was made otoscopy tympanometry and an audiometry in January 2015 before starting clinical surgery in June and October R: The incidence of hearing loss was presented in the Dental students was 23%, the average environmental noise measured during this study of hearing loss was presented in the Dental students in the three cuts was 91.3 dB exceeding the permissible limit according to OPS. There is a relationship between the hearing level of the dentistry student and the environmental noise characteristic of clinical and preclinical practices (p = 0.003). No Dental student uses a type of acoustic protection while performing clinical practices. C: The Relative Risk of mild hearing loss that is exposed to environmental noise typical of clinical practices in dentistry 2.97 times more than that which is not exposed to noise.RESUMO Os estudantes de odontologia estão expostos a vários riscos, um deles é o ruído ambiental causado por equipamentos odontológicos no decorrer do treinamento prático. O objetivo da pesquisa é determinar os níveis de audição de uma coorte de estudantes de odontologia expostos ao ruído ambiental ao longo do treinamento prático, em comparação com estudantes de fonoaudiologia, seguidos no ano 2015. Para o cumprimento do objetivo, realizou-se em uma coorte de estudantes de odontologia e estudantes de outro programa, uma avaliação a 63 estudantes de odontologia e 125 do outro programa. Assinado o consentimento informado se realizou-se otoscopia, timpanometria e uma audiometria em janeiro de 20l5 antes de começar praticas clínicas em junho e outubro. A incidência de hipoacusia leve apresentada nos estudantes de odontologia foi de 23%; o nível médio de ruído ambiental mensurado durante esse estudo nos três cortes feitos foi de 91,3 dB superando o limite permitido de acordo com a Organização Pan-americana da Saúde. Existe relação entre o nível de audição do estudante de odontologia e o ruído ambiental característico das práticas clínicas e pré-clínicas ( p=0,003). Nenhum estudante de odontologia usa qualquer tipo de proteção acústica durante realização das práticas clínicas. O risco relativo de apresentar hipoacusia leve ao ser exposto ao ruído ambiental próprio das práticas clinicas de odontologia é de 2,97 vezes a mais do que aquele não está exposto ao ruído.RESUMEN I: Los estudiantes de odontología se encuentran expuestos a diversos riesgos, uno de ellos es el ruido ambiental causado por equipos odontológicos durante la formación práctica. O: Determinar los niveles de audición de una cohorte de estudiantes de odontología expuestos a ruido ambiental durante la formación práctica, comparados con estudiantes de fonoaudiologia, seguidos en el año 2015. M: Se realizó en una cohorte de estudiantes de odontología y estudiantes de otro programa, se evaluaron 63 de odontología y 125 del otro programa. Firmado el consentimiento informado se realizó otoscopía, timpanometría y una audiometría en enero 2015 antes de iniciar las prácticas clínicas, en junio y en octubre. R: La incidencia de hipoacusia leve presentada en los estudiantes de odontología fue del 23%, el promedio de ruido ambiental medido durante este estudio en los tres cortes realizados fue de 91,3 dB superando el límite permisible de acuerdo con la Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Existe relación entre el nivel de audición del estudiante de odontología y el ruido ambiental propio de las prácticas clínicas y preclínicas (p=0,003). Ningún estudiante de odontología usa algún tipo de protección acústica mientras realizó las prácticas clínicas. C: El riesgo relativo de presentar hipoacusia leve estando expuesto al ruido ambiental propio de las prácticas clínicas en odontología es 2,97 veces más del que no está expuesto al ruido
Rogerio Heladio Lopes Motta - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Resistencia a antimicrobianos de microrganismos colhidos em artigos e equipamentos odontologicos
2017Co-Authors: Rogerio Heladio Lopes MottaAbstract:Resumo: O correto uso de materiais esterilizados e barreiras de proteção são essenciais para o tratamento odontológico seguro, tanto para o paciente como para o cirurgião-dentista, diminuindo os riscos de contaminação cruzada. O objetivo deste trabalho foi quantificar a prevalênciade bactérias no ambiente da Clínica Odontológica da Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba - UNICAMP. Foram realizadas colheitas de bactérias em diferentes locaisda Clínica utilizando-se swabs esterilizados, sendo colhidas amostras dos botões das cadeiras odontológicas, canhões de raio-X, luvas de procedimentos, maçanetas da porta de entrada da clínica, alças dos refletores, seringas tríplices e teclas "enter" dos computadores. As amostras foram colocadas em Placas de Petri contendo BHI e encubadas a 37° C, por 24 horas, assim como a 37°C, com 10% CO2, por 24 horas Os períodos de colheitas foram: antes, durante e após o término dos atendimentos da clínica. Foram contadas as unidades formadoras de colônias (ufc), sendo que a identificação presuntiva foi realizada utilizando-se o método de coloração de GRAM. A identificação das espécies foi feita através de testes bioquímicos. As bactérias colhidas foram submetidas ao teste de suscetibilidade antimicrobiana em agar, utilizando-se doze discos de antibióticos: ampicilina/10μg (amp),amoxicilina/10μg (amox), azitromicina/15μg (azi), claritromicina/15μg;g (cla),eritromicina/15μg (eri), cefadroxil/10μg (cef), clindamicina/2μg(clin), penicilina G/10u (pen), amoxicilina/20μg+ ácido clavulânico/10μg (amox+cla), cloranfenico/30μg(cio), oxacilina 1μg (oxa) e vancomicina 30μg (van) . As porcentagens de resistência aos antimicrobianostestados foram: amp (62%), amox (68%), azi (35%), clari (58%), eri (42%), cef (56%), clin (51%), pen (71%), amox+ cla (47%), cio (31%), oxa (11%) e van (0%). Os resultados mostraram que as bactérias mais prevalentes foram os Streptococcus do grupo viridans, seguidas por Staphy/ococcus epidermidis. O botão de acionamento de cadeira foi o local com maior contaminação.O maior número de bactérias foi encontrado durante as atividades clínicas, independente da situação clínica analisada. Com os resultados do trabalho, podemos concluir que: 1) A atividadeclínica aumenta a contaminação dos artigos e equipamentos odontológicos; 2) As bactérias encontradas mostraram alta porcentagem de resistência aos antibióticos testados; 3) Streptococcus do grupo viridans e Staphy/ococcus epidermidis foramos microrganismos mais encontrados .Abstract: Nowadays patients' infectious diseases mean serious risks to dentistry professionals. Thus, correct use of sterilized materiais, and self-protection Equipment is essential. Bioaerosolsare an important considerationfor infection control and occupational health, since infectious agents could be transmitted via aerosols to patients or staff in the confines of the Dental unit. The aim of this study was to identify microorganisms on Dental Equipment in the undergraduate clinic of Piracicaba Dentistry School. Also, antibiotic susceptibility tests were carried out against ali collected microorganisms. Microorganisms were collected from push buttons of Dental chairs, air-water syringes, X ray device, gloves, computer keys, doorknobs, reflector handle, and lobby chairs by using sterilized swabs. They were inoculated on BHI agar, and incubated at 37°Cj24h. Ali microorganisms were collected in three different periods, before, during, and after clinical procedures. After counting, microorganisms were classified using Gram staining. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were assayed using commercial paper discs on Mueller-Hinton agar with 5% sheep-blood. Microorganisms were Gram+ cocci (67%), Gram+bacilli(26%), Gram- cocci (5%), and others (2%). Rate of resistant strains was ampicillin/l0μg (62%), amoxicillin/l0μg (68%), azithromycin/15μg (35%), clarithromycin/15μg (58%) /erythromycin/15μg(58%), cefadroxil/l0μg (56%), clindamycin/2μg (51%), penicillin/l0μ (71%), amoxicillin/20μg +clavulanic acid/10μg acid(47%), chloramphenicol/ 30μg (31%), oxacillin (11%)and vancomycin (0%). Push buttons of Dental chairs were the most contaminated (p
-
Resistencia a antimicrobianos de microrganismos colhidos em artigos e equipamentos odontologicos
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, 2002Co-Authors: Rogerio Heladio Lopes MottaAbstract:O correto uso de materiais esterilizados e barreiras de proteção são essenciais para o tratamento odontológico seguro, tanto para o paciente como para o cirurgião-dentista, diminuindo os riscos de contaminação cruzada. O objetivo deste trabalho foi quantificar a prevalênciade bactérias no ambiente da Clínica Odontológica da Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba - UNICAMP. Foram realizadas colheitas de bactérias em diferentes locaisda Clínica utilizando-se swabs esterilizados, sendo colhidas amostras dos botões das cadeiras odontológicas, canhões de raio-X, luvas de procedimentos, maçanetas da porta de entrada da clínica, alças dos refletores, seringas tríplices e teclas "enter" dos computadores. As amostras foram colocadas em Placas de Petri contendo BHI e encubadas a 37° C, por 24 horas, assim como a 37°C, com 10% CO2, por 24 horas Os períodos de colheitas foram: antes, durante e após o término dos atendimentos da clínica. Foram contadas as unidades formadoras de colônias (ufc), sendo que a identificação presuntiva foi realizada utilizando-se o método de coloração de GRAM. A identificação das espécies foi feita através de testes bioquímicos. As bactérias colhidas foram submetidas ao teste de suscetibilidade antimicrobiana em agar, utilizando-se doze discos de antibióticos: ampicilina/10μg (amp),amoxicilina/10μg (amox), azitromicina/15μg (azi), claritromicina/15μg;g (cla), eritromicina/15μg (eri), cefadroxil/10μg (cef), clindamicina/2μg(clin), penicilina G/10u (pen), amoxicilina/20μg+ ácido clavulânico/10μg (amox+cla), cloranfenico/30μg(cio), oxacilina 1μg (oxa) e vancomicina 30μg (van) . As porcentagens de resistência aos antimicrobianostestados foram: amp (62%), amox (68%), azi (35%), clari (58%), eri (42%), cef (56%), clin (51%), pen (71%), amox+ cla (47%), cio (31%), oxa (11%) e van (0%). Os resultados mostraram que as bactérias mais prevalentes foram os Streptococcus do grupo viridans, seguidas por Staphy/ococcus epidermidis. O botão de acionamento de cadeira foi o local com maior contaminação.O maior número de bactérias foi encontrado durante as atividades clínicas, independente da situação clínica analisada. Com os resultados do trabalho, podemos concluir que: 1) A atividade clínica aumenta a contaminação dos artigos e equipamentos odontológicos; 2) As bactérias encontradas mostraram alta porcentagem de resistência aos antibióticos testados; 3) Streptococcus do grupo viridans e Staphy/ococcus epidermidis foram os microrganismos mais encontrados .Nowadays patients' infectious diseases mean serious risks to dentistry professionals. Thus, correct use of sterilized materiais, and self-protection Equipment is essential. Bioaerosolsare an important considerationfor infection control and occupational health, since infectious agents could be transmitted via aerosols to patients or staff in the confines of the Dental unit. The aim of this study was to identify microorganisms on Dental Equipment in the undergraduate clinic of Piracicaba Dentistry School. Also, antibiotic susceptibility tests were carried out against ali collected microorganisms. Microorganisms were collected from push buttons of Dental chairs, air-water syringes, X ray device, gloves, computer keys, doorknobs, reflector handle, and lobby chairs by using sterilized swabs. They were inoculated on BHI agar, and incubated at 37°Cj24h. Ali microorganisms were collected in three different periods, before, during, and after clinical procedures. After counting, microorganisms were classified using Gram staining. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were assayed using commercial paper discs on Mueller-Hinton agar with 5% sheep-blood. Microorganisms were Gram+ cocci (67%), Gram+bacilli(26%), Gram- cocci (5%), and others (2%). Rate of resistant strains was ampicillin/l0μg (62%), amoxicillin/l0μg (68%), azithromycin/15μg (35%), clarithromycin/15μg (58%) /erythromycin/15μg(58%), cefadroxil/l0μg (56%), clindamycin/2μg (51%), penicillin/l0μ (71%), amoxicillin/20μg +clavulanic acid/10μg acid(47%), chloramphenicol/ 30μg (31%), oxacillin (11%)and vancomycin (0%). Push buttons of Dental chairs were the most contaminated (p
Ailin Mahdkhah - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
intensity output and effectiveness of light curing units in Dental offices
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 2018Co-Authors: Baharanranjbar Omidi, Armin Gosili, Mona Jaberansari, Ailin MahdkhahAbstract:Background The aims of the study were measuring the light intensity of light curing units used in Qazvin's Dental offices, determining the relationship between the clinical age of these units and their light intensity, and identifying the reasons for repairing them. Material and Methods In this cross-sectional study, the output intensity of 95 light curing devices was evaluated using a radiometer. The average output intensity was divided up into four categories (less than 200, 200-299, 300-500, and more than 500 mW/cm2). In addition, a questionnaire was designed to obtain information mainly about the type, clinical age, and frequency of maintenance of the units and the reasons for fixing them. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov, chi-squared, and t-tests (p< 0.05) on SPSS 24. Results A total of 95 light curing units were examined, with 61 (64.2%) of them being of the LED type and 34 (35.8%) of the QTH type. While average light intensity in LED units was significantly higher than in QTH devices, the two device types were not significantly different regarding desirable light intensity (i.e., ≥ 300 mw/cm2). A negative correlation was observed between clinical age and light intensity. In addition, bulb replacement in QTH devices was over three times as much as in LED units. Also, repairing QTHs was more than twice as much frequent as fixing LEDs. The most common reason for repair was the breakage of the tip of the device. Conclusions The light intensity of LED units is significantly higher than that of QTH devices, and the frequency of repairing in QTHs was significantly more than in LEDs. Furthermore, light intensity decreases with aging, and dentists should regularly monitor the conditions of light units. Key words:Light curing unit, radiometer, light intensity, Dental Equipment, Dental offices.
Xavier De La Cruz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Risk of electromagnetic interference induced by Dental Equipment on cardiac implantable electrical devices.
European Journal of Oral Sciences, 2016Co-Authors: Jaume Miranda-rius, Eduard Lahor-soler, Lluís Brunet-llobet, Xavier De La CruzAbstract:Patients with cardiac implantable electrical devices should take special precautions when exposed to electromagnetic fields. Proximity to Equipment used in clinical dentistry may cause interference. This study evaluated in vitro the risks associated with different types/makes of cardiac devices and types of Dental Equipment. Six electronic Dental tools were tested on three implantable cardioverter defibrillators and three pacemakers made by different manufacturers. Overall, the risk of interference with the pacemakers was 37% lower than with the implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Regarding the types/makes of cardiac devices analysed, that from Boston Scientific had a five-fold greater risk of interference than did that from Biotronik [prevalence ratio (PR) = 5.58]; there was no difference between that from Biotronik and that from Medtronic. Among the Dental Equipment, the electric pulp tester had the greatest risk of inducing interference and therefore this device was used as the benchmark. The electronic apex locator (PR = 0.29), Periotest M (PR = 0.47), and the ultrasonic Dental scaler (PR = 0.59) were less likely to induce interference than the electric pulp tester. The risk was lowest with the electronic apex locator. Pacemakers presented a lower risk of light to moderate interference (PR = 0.63). However, the risk of severe electromagnetic interference was 3.5 times higher with pacemakers than with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (PR = 3.47).
-
Capacity of Dental Equipment to interfere with cardiac implantable electrical devices.
European Journal of Oral Sciences, 2015Co-Authors: Eduard Lahor-soler, Jaume Miranda-rius, Lluís Brunet-llobet, Xavier De La CruzAbstract:Patients with cardiac implantable electrical devices should take precautions when exposed to electromagnetic fields. Possible interference as a result of proximity to electromagnets or electricity flow from electronic tools employed in clinical odontology remains controversial. The objective of this study was to examine in vitro the capacity of Dental Equipment to provoke electromagnetic interference in pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Six electronic Dental instruments were tested on three implantable cardioverter defibrillators and three pacemakers from different manufacturers. A simulator model, submerged in physiological saline, with elements that reproduced life-size anatomic structures was used. The instruments were analyzed at differing distances and for different time periods of application. The Dental instruments studied displayed significant differences in their capacity to trigger electromagnetic interference. Significant differences in the quantity of registered interference were observed with respect to the variables manufacturer, type of cardiac implant, and application distance but not with the variable time of application. The electronic Dental Equipment tested at a clinical application distance (20 cm) provoked only slight interference in the pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators employed, irrespective of manufacturer.
Baharanranjbar Omidi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
intensity output and effectiveness of light curing units in Dental offices
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 2018Co-Authors: Baharanranjbar Omidi, Armin Gosili, Mona Jaberansari, Ailin MahdkhahAbstract:Background The aims of the study were measuring the light intensity of light curing units used in Qazvin's Dental offices, determining the relationship between the clinical age of these units and their light intensity, and identifying the reasons for repairing them. Material and Methods In this cross-sectional study, the output intensity of 95 light curing devices was evaluated using a radiometer. The average output intensity was divided up into four categories (less than 200, 200-299, 300-500, and more than 500 mW/cm2). In addition, a questionnaire was designed to obtain information mainly about the type, clinical age, and frequency of maintenance of the units and the reasons for fixing them. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov, chi-squared, and t-tests (p< 0.05) on SPSS 24. Results A total of 95 light curing units were examined, with 61 (64.2%) of them being of the LED type and 34 (35.8%) of the QTH type. While average light intensity in LED units was significantly higher than in QTH devices, the two device types were not significantly different regarding desirable light intensity (i.e., ≥ 300 mw/cm2). A negative correlation was observed between clinical age and light intensity. In addition, bulb replacement in QTH devices was over three times as much as in LED units. Also, repairing QTHs was more than twice as much frequent as fixing LEDs. The most common reason for repair was the breakage of the tip of the device. Conclusions The light intensity of LED units is significantly higher than that of QTH devices, and the frequency of repairing in QTHs was significantly more than in LEDs. Furthermore, light intensity decreases with aging, and dentists should regularly monitor the conditions of light units. Key words:Light curing unit, radiometer, light intensity, Dental Equipment, Dental offices.