Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33047356›Full record

ArticleClinical oral implants research2020

Dental care during COVID-19 pandemic: Survey of experts' opinion.

Kathrin Becker, Giulia Brunello, Katarzyna Gurzawska-Comis, Jürgen Becker, Stefano Sivolella, Frank Schwarz, Björn Klinge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Dental Preferences of Patients in the Private Sector.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kathrin BeckerDepartment of Orthodontics, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1936-4683
Giulia BrunelloDepartment of Neurosciences, Dentistry Section, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1436-0085
Katarzyna Gurzawska-ComisDepartment of Oral Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jürgen BeckerDepartment of Oral Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Stefano SivolellaDepartment of Neurosciences, Dentistry Section, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1916-1640
Frank SchwarzDepartment of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5515-227X
Björn KlingeFaculty of Odontology, Malmo University, Malmo, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2100-2446

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe current COVID-19 outbreak in conjunction with the need to provide safe dental treatments and the limited knowledge on the efficacy of protective measures has posed dentists into a challenging situation. Therefore, the present article aimed at collecting experiences and recommendations of frontline clinical experts on critical aspects of dental treatment provision during pandemic. MATERIAL &

methodsFrom a total of 32 European countries, one leading academic expert in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery or Oral Surgery per country was asked to participate in an anonymous online 10-item survey on COVID-19 covering the topics of safety of dental settings, personal protective equipment (PPE), and patient-related measures to reduce transmission risk. Data collection took place from April 12th to May 22nd, 2020.

resultsA total of 27 experts from different European countries completed the survey. The transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 in dental settings for aerosol-generating procedures was considered high by all experts except two. For aerosol-free and aerosol-generating procedures, more than 80% of the experts recommended face protection and caps for every single treatment. For aerosol-generating procedures, additional measures (FFP2/FFP3 masks and gowns) were suggested by the vast majority of the experts. To reduce transmission risk, all experts recommended limiting aerosol-generating procedures and reducing the number of patients in waiting areas as well as hand hygiene for the patients.

conclusionThe limitation of aerosol-generating procedures along with the usage of adequate personal protection equipment was considered to be crucial to protect dental healthcare providers and patients, thus reducing the transmission risk of COVID-19.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Pneumonia, ViralDental CareHumansInfectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-ProfessionalPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairescoronavirusCOVID-19expert opinionpandemicpatient triagepersonal protective equipment

Identifiers

PMID33047356
PMCPMC7675432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.