ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2021
Dental workers in front-line of COVID-19: an in silico evaluation targeting their prevention.
Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- SARS-CoV-2 proteins show great binding affinity to resin composite monomers and polymerized chains.World journal of experimental medicine · 2025Review
- Repurposing povidone-iodine to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission: a narrative review.Annals of medicine · 2022Review
- Recent evidence sustains the use of chlorhexidine-based mouthwash for dental patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic.American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2022Article
- Authors' response.American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSARS-CoV-2 has high human-human transmission rate. The aerosols and saliva droplets are the main contamination source. Thus, it is crucial to point out that dental practitioners become a high-risk group of contagion by SARS-CoV-2. Based on this, protocols have been recommended to avoid cross-contamination during dental care; however, appropriate evidence has not yet been established. Our study sought to make a screening, by in silico analysis, of the potential of mouth rinses used in dental practices to prevent the dental workers' contamination by SARS-CoV-2. METHODOLOGY: Multiple sequence comparisons and construction of the phylogenetic tree were conducted using the FASTA code. Therefore, molecular docking investigation between SARS-CoV-2 proteins (Main Protease, Spike Glycoprotein, Non-structure Protein, and Papain-like Protease) and molecules used in dental practices (chlorhexidine digluconate, hydrogen peroxide, cetylpyridinium chloride, povidone-iodine, gallic acid, β-cyclodextrin, catechin, and quercetin) was performed using AutoDock Vina. Moreover, 2D interactions of the complex protein-ligand structure were analyzed by Ligplot+.
resultsThe obtained results showed a remarkable affinity between SARS-CoV-2 proteins and all tested compounds. The chlorhexidine digluconate, catechin, and quercetin presented a higher affinity with SARS-CoV-2.
conclusionsThe overall results allowed us to suggest that chlorhexidine is the most suitable active compound in reducing the SARS-CoV-2 salivary load due to its better binding energy. However, in vivo studies should be conducted to confirm their clinical use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.