Background:The recent outbreak of coronavirus (COVID-19) caused a significant impact on dentistry. It is imperative to have sufficient knowledge of COVID-19 to manage patients in the dental operatory. Aim: To assess the knowledge and perceptions of dentists from different specialities about COVID-19 disease. Settings and Design: Cross-sectional online survey. Materials and Methods: This study used a descriptive cross-sectional study design with a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire included three sets of 23 questions [Demographic-4; Source of information-1; Knowledge-10 and Perceptions-8]. The comparison of mean scores of knowledge and perceptions were interpreted based on the occupation of dental specialists. Statistical Analysis Used: The association between demographic variables and dental specialists' knowledge and perception scores was carried out using SPSS (Version IBM 21.0, NY, USA). Results: A total of 429 dentists from various specialties participated in the present study. The study had obtained a overall good knowledge score (92.7%) with a mean value of 8.86 + 0.22, and a perception score (70.7%) with a mean value of 5.4+0.3. The present study reports a statistically significant difference between age (p=0.03) and knowledge source (p<0.05). The multi variate regression analysis showed that dentists' specialty had no significant effect on knowledge and perception. Conclusion:The study reports sufficient knowledge and perception scores. Oral maxillofacial surgeons showed higher knowledge scores, while prosthodontics and periodontics achieved good mean scores for perception on COVID-19. Social media and health authorities played an equally important role in the overall knowledge of the source of information related to COVID-19.

BackgroundTo evaluate the closure of midline diastema using the Neodymium-Iron-Boron magnets and to compare the treatment duration of midline diastemas with the use of magnets compared to regular orthodontic treatment.Material and MethodsThirty patients with age group 12 to 30 years with the midline diastema ranging from 0.5 to 3mm were selected. These patients were divided into two groups. Diastema closure in one group was accomplished by conventional method, in other group was done with Ne2Fe14B magnets. These magnets were fitted to the labial surfaces of the maxillary central incisors such a way that the opposite poles of the magnets face each other. At each appointment, study models and radiographs were taken for study subjects and the midline diastema was measured using digital vernier calipers on the study models obtained. Descriptive statistics carried out using Paired t-test.ResultsSubjects treated with Ne2Fe14B magnets showed a significant difference compared to fixed orthodontic appliance subjects with respect to time of closure, rate of space closure and incisal inclination. Significant difference between 2 groups with reduction of 64.6 days in time to diastema closure in subjects treated with Ne2Fe14B magnets (P<0.05).ConclusionsNe2Fe14B magnets more efficient in complete closure of mid line diastema in less duration of time. Key words:Midline diastema, Ne2Fe14B magnets, rare earth magnets, space closure.

Objective. The treatment protocol in the modern health care paradigm has shifted considerably towards enhancing the quality of life in the last decade. This is particularly important in cosmetic and elective treatments, and hence the interest in oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) also has increased. OHRQoL always been measured by endogenous, functional, social, or psychological determinants. Self-esteem (SE) is one of the internal factors that affect the perception of malocclusion and hence OHRQoL before and after treatment. The purpose of this review is to assess whether there exists any correlation between the Oral Health-Related Quality of Life, Self-esteem (SE) in patients following orthodontic treatment. Methods. A literature search was confined to the English language using Medical Subject Heading terms (MeSH) in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ovid® covering the period from January 1, 1951 to May 15, 2020. Search in Google Scholar, grey literature, and hand search on cross-references was performed to find additional data. The studies found to be suitable were selected based on the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of assessment and risk of bias for the included studies were evaluated independently by two invigilators utilizing “The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias” and “Modified version of the Newcastle Ottawa scale” for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and non-randomized trials respectively. Results. A total of 7688 studies were retrieved from all the sources. After screening all the titles and excluding the duplicates, 28 studies were finally included for text review, and all of them were fit for quality appraisal. The design of the final studies included comprised of 3 RCTs, 14 cohort studies, 9 cross-sectional studies, and 2 case-control studies. Conclusion. There is moderate evidence to show that fixed orthodontic treatment improves OHRQoL and SE in children. OHRQoL also increased in adolescents and adults. However, there is a weak correlation between SE and OHRQoL. More evidence-based studies are needed to analyze the relationship.

Background. The purpose of this randomized trial is to compare the efficacy of weekly once regime of neutral sodium fluoride (NaF) oral rinse with that of acidulated phosphate (APF) formulated daily mouth rinse in the reduction of white spot lesions (WSLs) associated with fixed orthodontic appliance treatment. Methods. The participants ( n = 90 ) of this single-center, two-arm parallel study without a control group were randomly assigned with 1 : 1 distribution to each of the two groups after the bonding of brackets. Group A/test group 1 ( n = 45 ) was given weekly rinse of neutral sodium fluoride (Colgate® PreviDent® Dental Rinse-0.2% NaF), and for group B/test group 2 ( n = 45 ), an APF formulated daily oral rinse (Colgate® Ortho Defense@ PhosFlur® Rinse-0.044% w/v of NaF) was given for six months. The outcome was assessed by the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) index for scoring the demineralization, and for scoring gingivitis, Loe and Silness gingival index (GI) was utilized. Four different time points “T0”immediately before bonding procedures, “T1” after 4weeks, “T2” after 12 weeks, and “T3” after 24 weeks were taken to assess the ICDAS and GI scores. Results. The mean ICDAS scores for group A (NaF) were 0.025, 0.051, 0.093, and 0.113 and for group B (APF) were 0.014, 0.022, 0.038, and 0.015 at different points of time. The GI scores for group A were 0.008, 0.22, 0.33, and 0.38 and for group B were 0.003, 0.136, 0.181, and 0.097 at different time points. There was a statistically significant difference ( p < 0.05 ) for both groups in terms of reducing WSL and GI. Conclusion. APF formulated daily oral rinse—0.044% w/v of NaF—is more effective than the weekly once regimen of 0.2% NaF oral rinse to prevent white spot lesions.

No abstract