ArticleBDJ open2022
A qualitative analysis of dental professionals' beliefs and concerns about providing aerosol generating procedures early in the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in BDJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Electrolyzed water for the microbiologic control in the pandemic dental setting: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2022Pooled it
- Healthcare workers' infection risk perceptions of aerosol-generating procedures and affective response.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2023Article
- Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use.BMC oral health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Scottish Dental Clinical Effectiveness Programme (SDCEP) initiated a rapid review of the evidence related to the generation and mitigation of aerosols in dental practice. To support this review, a survey was distributed to better understand the provision of aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) in dentistry.
methodsAn online questionnaire was distributed to dental professionals asking about their current practice and beliefs about AGPs. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsAnalysis revealed confusion and uncertainty regarding mitigation of AGPs. There was also frustration and scepticism over the risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission within dental settings, the evidence underpinning the restrictions and the leadership and guidance being provided, as well as concern over financial implications and patient and staff safety. DISCUSSION: The frustration and concerns expressed by respondents mirrored findings from other recent studies and suggest there is a need for reflection within the profession so that lessons can be learned to better support staff and patients.
conclusionUnderstanding the profession's views about AGP provision contributed to the SDCEP rapid review and provides insights to help inform policymakers and leaders in anticipation not only of future pandemics but in considering the success of any large scale and/or rapid organisational change.
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.