Dataset Information

Estimating COVID-19 prevalence and infection control practices among US dentists.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Understanding the risks associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission during oral health care delivery and assessing mitigation strategies for dental offices are critical to improving patient safety and access to oral health care.

Methods

The authors invited licensed US dentists practicing primarily in private practice or public health to participate in a web-based survey in June 2020. Dentists from every US state (n = 2,195) answered questions about COVID-19-associated symptoms, SARS-CoV-2 infection, mental and physical health conditions, and infection control procedures used in their primary dental practices.

Results

Most of the dentists (82.2%) were asymptomatic for 1 month before administration of the survey; 16.6% reported being tested for SARS-CoV-2; and 3.7%, 2.7%, and 0% tested positive via respiratory, blood, and salivary samples, respectively. Among those not tested, 0.3% received a probable COVID-19 diagnosis from a physician. In all, 20 of the 2,195 respondents had been infected with SARS-CoV-2; weighted according to age and location to approximate all US dentists, 0.9% (95% confidence interval, 0.5 to 1.5) had confirmed or probable COVID-19. Dentists reported symptoms of depression (8.6%) and anxiety (19.5%). Enhanced infection control procedures were implemented in 99.7% of dentists' primary practices, most commonly disinfection, COVID-19 screening, social distancing, and wearing face masks. Most practicing dentists (72.8%) used personal protective equipment according to interim guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Conclusions

COVID-19 prevalence and testing positivity rates were low among practicing US dentists. This indicates that the current infection control recommendations may be sufficient to prevent infection in dental settings.

Practical implications

Dentists have enhanced their infection control practices in response to COVID-19 and may benefit from greater availability of personal protective equipment. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04423770.

SUBMITTER: Estrich CG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7560385 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite the availability of prevention guidelines and recommendations on infection control, many dental practices lack the minimum requirements for infection control. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to assess the level of awareness, perception, and attitude regarding the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and infection control among Jordanian dentists. METHODS:The study population consisted of dentists who worked in private clinics, hospitals, and health centers in Jordan. An online questionnaire was sent to a sample of Jordanian dentists in March 2020. The questionnaire was comprised of a series of questions about dentists' demographic characteristics; their awareness of the incubation period, the symptoms of the disease, mode of transmission of COVID-19 and infection control measures for preventing COVID-19; and their attitude toward treating patients with COVID-19. RESULTS:This study included a total of 368 dentists aged 22-73 years (mean 32.9 years, SD 10.6 years). A total of 112 (30.4%) dentists had completed a master or residency program in dentistry, 195 (53.0%) had received training in infection control in dentistry, and 28 (7.6%) had attended training or lectures regarding COVID-19. A total of 133 (36.1%) dentists reported that the incubation period is 1-14 days. The majority of dentists were aware of COVID-19 symptoms and ways of identifying patients at risk of having COVID-19, were able to correctly report known modes of transmission, and were aware of measures for preventing COVID-19 transmission in dental clinics. A total of 275 (74.7%) believed that it was necessary to ask patients to sit far from each other, wear masks while in the waiting room, and wash hands before getting in the dental chair to decrease disease transmission. CONCLUSIONS:Jordanian dentists were aware of COVID-19 symptoms, mode of transmission, and infection controls and measures in dental clinics. However, dentists had limited comprehension of the extra precautionary measures that protect the dental staff and other patients from COVID-19. National and international guidelines should be sent by the regional and national dental associations to all registered dentists during a crisis, including the COVID-19 pandemic, to make sure that dentists are well informed and aware of best practices and recommended disease management approaches.

Project description:Accurately estimating infection prevalence is fundamental to the study of population health, disease dynamics, and infection risk factors. Prevalence is estimated as the proportion of infected individuals ("individual-based estimation"), but is also estimated as the proportion of samples in which evidence of infection is detected ("anonymous estimation"). The latter method is often used when researchers lack information on individual host identity, which can occur during noninvasive sampling of wild populations or when the individual that produced a fecal sample is unknown. The goal of this study was to investigate biases in individual-based versus anonymous prevalence estimation theoretically and to test whether mathematically derived predictions are evident in a comparative dataset of gastrointestinal helminth infections in nonhuman primates. Using a mathematical model, we predict that anonymous estimates of prevalence will be lower than individual-based estimates when (a) samples from infected individuals do not always contain evidence of infection and/or (b) when false negatives occur. The mathematical model further predicts that no difference in bias should exist between anonymous estimation and individual-based estimation when one sample is collected from each individual. Using data on helminth parasites of primates, we find that anonymous estimates of prevalence are significantly and substantially (12.17%) lower than individual-based estimates of prevalence. We also observed that individual-based estimates of prevalence from studies employing single sampling are on average 6.4% higher than anonymous estimates, suggesting a bias toward sampling infected individuals. We recommend that researchers use individual-based study designs with repeated sampling of individuals to obtain the most accurate estimate of infection prevalence. Moreover, to ensure accurate interpretation of their results and to allow for prevalence estimates to be compared among studies, it is essential that authors explicitly describe their sampling designs and prevalence calculations in publications.