Objectives: To find out prescription patterns of general practitioners in Peshawar. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of drug prescriptions was done at six major hospitals and pharmacies of Peshawar between April and May 2011. A total of 1097 prescriptions that included 3640 drugs, were analyzed to assess completeness, average number of drugs, prescription frequency of various drug classes, and number of brands prescribed. Results: No prescription contained all essential components of a prescription. Legibility was poor in 58.5% prescriptions. Physician’s name and registration number were not mentioned in 89% and 98.2% prescriptions respectively. Over 78% prescriptions did not have diagnosis or indication mentioned. Dosage, duration of use, signature of physician and directions for taking drugs were not written in 63.8%, 55.4%, 18.5% and 10.9% of prescriptions respectively. On average each prescription included 3.32 drugs. Most frequently prescribed drug classes included analgesics (61.7%), anti-infective agents (57.2%), multi-vitamins (37.8%) and gastrointestinal drugs (34.4%). We found 206, 130, 105 and 101 different brands of anti-infective agents, gastrointestinal drugs, analgesics and multivitamins being prescribed. Conclusion: We observed a high number of average drugs per prescription mostly using brand names, and over-prescription of analgesics, antimicrobials, multivitamins and anti-ulcer drugs. Quality of written prescriptions was poor in terms of completeness.

The purpose of this article is to review approaches to the assessment of familial patterns of microbial infection and disease in periodontitis, and to identify statistical methods appropriate to such considerations of family data. Previous studies have provided evidence for the presence of familial aggregation of periodontal pathogens and periodontitis and have alluded to possible transmissibility of these organisms within families. Modern statistical techniques permit the appropriate analysis of the correlated data inherent in families, properly allowing for these statistical dependencies while including the possibility of adjustment for risk factors which may also aggregate in families. Such approaches as multiple linear regression, multivariate logistic regression, and regressive modeling provide the necessary tools to assess the familial aggregation of risk factors and disease in periodontitis. In particular, regressive models permit the analysis of familiality (membership to family) as a risk factor without reference to a specific underlying biologic mechanism, and also permit the possibility of adjustment for covariates, such as age and access to dental care. They also allow consideration of specific mechanisms, e.g., susceptibility genes of major effect. Using such techniques, it is possible to more completely explore and describe familial patterns of periodontal infection and other aspects of periodontal disease.

Medical laboratories in general operate with various hazardous chemicals. The storage, usage and knowledge about the hazardous chemicals are important aspects of safety measures employed in Medical Laboratories. This comparative study explores the differences in safety measures and knowledge of chemical safety among laboratory employees in Public (PBL) and Private (PRL) Hospital medical laboratories. This cross-sectional study was conducted in randomly selected Public and Private Hospital laboratories in Buraydah, Al Qassim, in 2013. The study was designed to: estimate the proportion and types of the hazardous chemicals used in the laboratories with a chemicals list; to assess safety measures currently being practiced with a standard chemical safety measures checklist; and to assess laboratory employee awareness on chemical safety with an interview schedule. Public Laboratories showed better results as

Background The enrollment of international periodontal students in U.S. dental schools has been increasing in recent years. Interest in applying to a periodontics specialty program may differ between U.S and international dental school graduates. The purpose of this study is to assess, from the perspective of periodontal residents, (1) factors that interest dental students to apply to periodontics programs and (2) differences in background and interest between U.S and international graduates. Methods A 20-question survey was sent out electronically to periodontics residents. The survey questions were designed to obtain information on the participants’ backgrounds, factors that influenced them to specialize in periodontics, and their preferred features of graduate periodontics programs. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics for socio-demographic variables, a Wilcoxon two sample test to compare mean Likert scale scores, and Fisher’s exact test for associations between comparison groups. Results Of the two hundred residents invited to participate, 28% responded. The majority of the respondents stated that interest in implantology, previous exposure to periodontal procedures, interest in improving periodontal surgery skills, a good relationship with periodontics faculty, the residency curriculum, advanced program and faculty reputation as influencing factors in selecting periodontics as specialization. The majority of international graduates have up to $50,000 dollars in student debt; by comparison, half of the domestic graduates have a debt of over $250,000 dollars (p ≤ 0.05). Working experience as a dentist was significantly greater among international residents (73%) in comparison to U.S graduates (32%). In contrast with international graduates, U.S graduates more frequent reported that good relationships with the periodontics predoctoral faculty contributed to their interest in periodontics (p ≤ 0.05). Program cost and location had a greater impact on the decision of U.S. graduates than international graduates (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusions Overall, factors associated with personal finance and predoctoral education have a greater impact on the decision of American graduates than international graduates to pursue an advanced education in periodontics, which may influence the increased enrollment of international students.

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the status of laser use and training in the U.S. and Canadian graduate periodontology programs. A survey questionnaire was sent electronically to 55 periodontology program directors in North America. The questions focused on laser implementation, types of lasers used, for which procedures lasers were used, and level of education/clinical training provided to residents. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Fisher’s exact test. Twenty-two directors responded (40%). Most programs (86%) used lasers and 89% used a diode laser. Laser treatment was the most used for periimplantitis (84%). Fifteen programs (79%) provided didactic and clinical training, with 47% programs giving 4–12 h of didactic training. In 53% of programs, residents completed 4 to10 procedures. Only 29% of programs had residents who had received a certification in lasers, with most (80%) programs requiring between 1–9 cases for certification. Of the participants not providing laser training, the major barrier was indicated as being “expense”, with 68.7% reporting plans to implement laser education. Conclusions: Most graduate periodontics programs were providing laser training and treatment. There was great variability regarding the training methods, specifically in number of dedicated laser courses, time allocated for laser training, and prerequisites for laser certification.