HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by KUGEL, G. Articles by LALICATA, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by KUGEL, G. Articles by LALICATA, P.

JADA Continuing Education

OF U.S. DENTAL LABORATORIES

Background. The need to disinfect impressions is crucial to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases. The authors report the results of a survey of U.S. dental laboratory directors. The survey was designed to determine how well dental laboratory personnel are communicating with dentists regarding the disinfection of impressions, and, in turn, what laboratory technicians are doing to protect themselves against microbial cross-contamination.

Methods. Four hundred dental laboratory directors were selected in a blinded and random manner. To create a geographically representative sample, an equal number of laboratory directors from the East, Midwest and West were interviewed. A survey consisting of 16 open-ended questions was conducted by trained interviewers via 10- to 15-minute telephone interviews. All dental laboratory directors stated that they were thoroughly familiar with their laboratory’s disinfection protocol.

Results. The survey documented that the majority of impressions were made of polyvinyl (57 percent) or polyether (27 percent) materials. Only 44 percent of the respondents stated that they knew if the impressions they received had been disinfected. Twenty-three percent of the laboratory directors did not know the method of disinfection used, and 47 percent did not know the length of time involved. Forty-five percent of the respondents reported that they receive inadequate instruction in regard to disinfection techniques. No one class of impression materials was found to be more problematic than others by the laboratory directors.

Conclusions. The results indicate a significant and problematic lack of communication between these team members. The responses also suggested that laboratory-perceived problems with impressions were not linked to any particular type of material, but more to the disinfection technique used.

Practice Implications. Lack of communication between dentists, staff members and dental laboratory personnel, along with poor training of laboratory personnel in disinfection techniques, may have a direct effect on the prosthetic results achieved in dental practices.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Z. N. Al-Dwairi Infection Control Procedures in Commercial Dental Laboratories in Jordan J Dent Educ., September 1, 2007; 71(9): 1223 - 1227. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]