The current study aims to assess the effectiveness of e-learning in compliance with the new biosafety recommendations in dentistry in the context of COVID-19 applied to the clinical staff of a dental school in Brazil. A quasi-experimental epidemiological study was carried out by means of a structured, pre-tested online questionnaire, applied before and after an educational intervention, using an e-learning format. After data collection, statistical tests were performed. A total of 549 members of the clinical staff participated in the study in the two collection phases, with a return rate of 26.9%.After the e-learning stage, a reduction was found in the reported use of disposable gloves, protective goggles, and surgical masks. The course had no impact on the staff's knowledge concerning the proper sequence for donning PPE and showed 100% effectiveness regarding proper PPE doffing sequence. Knowledge about avoiding procedures that generate aerosols in the clinical setting was improved. Despite the low rate of return, it can be concluded that online intervention alone was ineffective in significantly improving learning about the new clinical biosafety guidelines. Therefore, the use of hybrid teaching and repetitive training is highly recommended.

Objective: To evaluate knowledge and attitudes towards biosafety recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic at a Brazilian dental school. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in 2020 with the clinical staff of a Brazilian dental school. The whole clinical staff was sent pre-tested selfadministered online questionnaires about knowledge and attitudes towards the recommendations for biosafety in dental settings in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistical analyses were carried out for proportion calculation. Results: Disposable head covering caps, isolation gowns, and gloves were the most frequently reported personal protective equipment (PPE). The rates ranged from 52.9% to 88.5% for N95 respirators, from 68.6% to 92.6% for face shields, from 47.4% to 67.5% for conventional eye protection shields, and 45.1% to 77.4% for eye protection with solid side shields. Chlorhexidine gluconate was the most frequent mouthwash indicated before clinical dental care. The percentage of agreement to provide clinical care to patients with suspected COVID-19 varied from 23.5% to 50.0%. The percentage of respondents who agreed that bioaerosol-generating procedures should be avoided was higher than 74.5%. Less than 50% knew the correct sequence for doffing of PPE. Conclusion: This study revealed important gaps in knowledge and attitudes towards prevention and control measures against infection in dental environments in the context of COVID-19, indicating the need for improvements.