Injury Reports in a Dental School: A Two‐Year Overview

Abstract

As teaching institutions, it is vital for dental schools to collect data on accidental injuries to identify potential problems, improve the quality of care of patients, and educate future practitioners about risk management. Our data reveal important trends concerning such injuries. These data were compiled over a two-year period (2001-03) from accident reports at one dental school. We categorized the accidents as follows: source (instrument causing the injury), recipient of injury, time of day, location within the dental school where the injury occurred, and body part injured. The population examined in this study consisted of predoctoral and postdoctoral dental students, staff, faculty, and patients of the dental school. The majority of injuries occurred in the predoctoral clinic toward the middle to the end of the scheduled clinic periods. The instrument most likely involved was a needle, and the body part most commonly injured was a finger. The collection and analysis of injury data may be used to identify trends that will aid in the prediction and prevention of these injuries and, at a national level, serve as a benchmark that other dental schools can employ to assess their relative frequency of injury.

Percutaneous exposure incidents: a review of practice and awareness of current protocols at a Dental Faculty

“…These injuries could have been avoided by the correct placement of the hand‐piece sideways and away from the operating field and using protective caps on scaler tips. Our study found that fingers were the most common anatomical sites of injury, which is in agreement with findings reported by other research.…”

“…Higher PEIs in our study were due to dental anaesthetic needles, followed by bur and scaler tips, a breakdown consistent with other published reports from dental teaching institutes. A high percentage of percutaneous incidents occurred as a result of needle recapping which is also in agreement with the literature.…”

“…These injuries could have been avoided by following the recommended techniques of needle recapping. One interesting finding was that almost 20% of AS and 7.7% of PGs were not practising safe techniques to recap anaesthetic needles, indicating that theoretical approach alone might not be sufficient and there is need for work practice controls, reinforcement of departmental protocol, additional training and behavioural intervention at all levels. The study also noticed a significantly higher percentage of females were compliant with the departmental protocol of using a one hand ‘scoop’ technique or needle block (or both) compared with that of males.…”

Operator preference of retraction method during anesthesia delivery

“…[1][2][3] Existing dental anesthesia curriculums and educational programs have not emphasized techniques other than using the finger for retraction of mucosa. [4][5][6][7] Literature presents cases of needlestick injuries (NSIs) when finger is used to retract mucosa to deliver anesthesia. 8,9 Innovations towards dental anesthesia delivery have progressed throughout the years.…”

“…8,9 Innovations towards dental anesthesia delivery have progressed throughout the years. 1,4,[10][11][12][13] In addition, various instruments exist both in clinical practice and on the market to aid in retraction (cheek retractor, tongue depressor etc). 1,[14][15][16] In 2010, a device was approved for purchase in the United States for use during dental anesthesia delivery (Fig.…”