Observational studyBMC oral health2026
Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding cross-infection control among dental laboratory technicians in Bulgaria: a cross-sectional study.
Observational study in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCross-infection control is essential for high-quality oral health care. Dental technicians, as key members of the dental team, handle clinical materials and manage laboratory processes that pose biological risks. Despite their university-level training in Bulgaria, little is known about their awareness, attitudes, and compliance with infection control standards.
methodsA nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted from August 2024 to March 2025 among dental technicians registered with the Bulgarian Dental Technician Association. An online questionnaire was used to assess their knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding cross-infection control. The sample included 203 technicians, or (17%) of the ones registered with the professional organization. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression to identify predictors of guidelines compliance.
resultsWhile 85% of respondents rated their infection control knowledge as good or excellent, and 75% correctly defined cross-infection, actual compliance with recommended practices was low. Only 10.8% demonstrated adequate adherence to guidelines, based on an 18-point practice score. Major deficiencies were identified in regard to the disinfection of dental materials, use of personal protective equipment, and it was established that the hepatitis B vaccination coverage was low (44.3%). Nearly 90% reported frequent or occasional sharp object injuries. Communication failures between dental laboratories and clinics were notable: 48.5% of the materials received lacked disinfection status information. Regression analysis showed that lower self-assessed implementation of infection control measures, older age, and poor knowledge of cross-infection definitions significantly predicted poorer practice scores (R² = 0.316, p < 0.001).
conclusionThe study revealed a significant discrepancy between perceived knowledge and actual practice regarding cross-infection prevention among Bulgarian dental technicians. Although participants expressed positive attitudes and recognized the importance of infection control, their reported practices often fell short of international standards. These findings underscore the urgent need for continuous education, better interprofessional communication,, and regulatory oversight to enhance infection prevention and control in dental laboratories.
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.