PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 1666310

Infection control in dentistry.

Abstract

The risk of transmission of infection within the dental workplace is low, but recent data have indicated that human immunodeficiency virus transmission between dentist and patient can occur, and that while nosocomial transmission of hepatitis B virus is now less likely, a small but significant number of staff may be at risk of hepatitis C virus and varicella zoster virus infection during dental treatment. Despite these continued risks, shortcomings remain in cross-infection control in the dental workplace. Dental clinicians still fail to take adequate steps to minimize nosocomial infection, inconsistently using appropriate methods of sterilization and not providing ancillary staff with suitable protective clothing. Similarly, although vaccinated against hepatitis B virus, a substantial number of clinicians are reluctant to treat hepatitis B virus- or human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. Cross-infection control procedures continue to be modified. Of importance, it has been confirmed that protective rubber gloves cannot be reused, as micropunctures develop during rewashing. Sharps injuries are common in dental practice, but there are still no effective measures to prevent postinjury human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C virus infection. Instrument sterilization is generally safe and effective, but the contamination of dental unit water supplies remains to be overcome, and while impressions can be placed in disinfectants for up to 1 hour without significant dimensional change, it is not known if infectious agents within the impression material are inactivated by this procedure.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S R Porter. 1991. Infection control in dentistry.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1666310/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Sexual abuse of children: the necessity of medical intervention].

Recently the Dutch Health Council published a report on the medical aspects of sexual abuse of children. The questions underlying this report reflect an attempt to arrive at hard indices of sexual abuse in children through the assessment of physical symptoms. For the medical assessment, the authors refer to the Dutch translation of an English report entitled Physical signs of sexual abuse in children, published by The Royal College of Physicians. The hazards connected with the exclusive focus on physical symptoms are recognized, and the authors stress that medical examination should be part of a much broader assessment of the child and his/her family. However, instead of confining themselves to assessment issues of physical symptoms, the authors add a rather meagre account of behavioural and emotional factors relevant to the diagnosis of sexual abuse of children. Unfortunately, this approach seems to aggravate the problems underlying misdiagnosis rather than to increase diagnostic accuracy and improve adequate care for sexually abused children.

Attitude of Health Personnel