The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 129, No 12, 1725-1731.
© 1998 American Dental Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HARTE, J.
Right arrow Articles by RICHARDSON, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by HARTE, J.
Right arrow Articles by RICHARDSON, B.
Related Collections
Right arrow Dental Equipment/Instruments

CLINICAL PRACTICE

JADA Continuing Education

THE INFLUENCE OF DENTAL UNIT DESIGN ON PERCUTANEOUS INJURY



JENNIFER HARTE, D.D.S., M.S., RICHARD DAVIS, D.D.S., THOMAS PLAMONDON, D.D.S. and BRUCE RICHARDSON, D.D.S.

The handpiece receptacle of a European, buggy-whip–style dental unit is in a different location than that of a conventional dental unit. This study investigated whether this difference affects the incidence of percutaneous injuries among dental professionals. The researchers asked dental professionals to record descriptions of percutaneous injuries they sustained during a period of 30 workdays. Findings indicated that most injuries were bur-related and that there was no statistically significant difference between the European and the conventional dental units with respect to the incidence of percutaneous injury.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-1998 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.