Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:58:02.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Infection Control Practices of General Dental Practitioners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Gillian M. McCarthy*
Affiliation:
School of Dentistry and Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, the University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
John K. MacDonald
Affiliation:
School of Dentistry and Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, the University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
*
Division of Oral Biology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, the University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada

Abstract

Objectives:

To investigate the infection control practices of general dentists in Ontario in 1994.

Design:

Confidential coded questionnaires were mailed to all general dental practitioners in Ontario (n=5,176), with three follow-up attempts. Data were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared test and multiple logistic regression.

Setting:

Offices of general dental practitioners in Ontario.

Participants:

General dental practitioners actively involved in treating patients.

Results:

The response rate adjusted for nondelivery was 70%. A high proportion of respondents reported using gloves (always, 91.8%; sometimes, 7.8%), masks (always, 74.8%; sometimes, 21.1%), or protective eyewear (always, 83.6%; sometimes, 13%); heat sterilization of hand-pieces (83.9%); and hepatitis B (HBV) vaccination of dentists (92.3%). However, only 61.4% of respondents reported HBV vaccination of all clinical staff, and 87.7% used additional precautions for patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Significant predictors of the use of recommended infection control procedures (ie, always using gloves, masks, and eye protection; heat sterilization of handpieces; HBV vaccination for dentist and staff; and no extra precautions for patients with HIV) were age ?40 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.6), lack of concern regarding increased personal risk (OR, 2.0) or costs of infection control procedures (OR, 1.5), and knowledge of the low infectivity of HIV after a needlestick injury (OR, 2.0) and that infection control procedures for HBV are adequate for HIV (OR, 2.7).

Conclusion:

Additional education is required to promote a more realistic perception of risk of HIV transmission in the dental office and the use of all recommended infection control practices, including Universal Precautions.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Centers for Disease Control. Recommendations for preventing transmission of human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis B virus to patients during exposure-prone invasive procedures. MMWR 1991;40(RR-8):19.Google Scholar
2. American Dental Association. Infection control recommendations for the dental office and the dental laboratory. JADA 1996;127:672680.Google Scholar
3. Canadian Dental Association. Recommendations for infection control procedures. Communiqué. 05 1992:10.Google Scholar
4. Osterman, JW. Beyond Universal Precautions. Can Med Assoc J 1995;152:10511055.Google ScholarPubMed
5. Gershon, RRM, Vlahov, D, Felknor, SA, et al. Compliance with Universal Precautions among health care workers at three regional hospitals. Am J Infect Control 1995;23:225236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Hersey, JC, Martin, LS. Use of infection control guidelines by workers in healthcare facilities to prevent occupational transmission of HBV and HIV: results from a national survey. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1994;15:243252.Google Scholar
7. Soto, JC, Levi, MD, Allard, R, Franko, EL. Determinants of AIDS preventive behaviour among dental professionals. Can J Public Health 1993;84:128131.Google ScholarPubMed
8. Dillman, DA. Implementing mail surveys. In: Dillman, DA, ed. Mail and Telephone Surveys. The Total Design Method. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: John Wiley & Sons; 1978:160200.Google Scholar
9. McCarthy, GM, Koval, JJ, MacDonald, JK. Non-response bias in a survey of Ontario dentists' infection control and attitudes concerning HIV. J Pub Health Dent 1997;57:5962.Google Scholar
10. Nash, KD. How infection control procedures are affecting dental practice today. J Am Dent Assoc 1992;123:6773.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Manz, MC, Weyant, RJ, Adelson, R, Sverha, SK, Durnan, JR, Geboy, MJ. Impact of HIV on VA dental services: report of a survey. J Public Health Dent 1994;54:197204.Google Scholar
12. McCarthy, GM, MacDonald, JK. Gender differences in characteristics, infection control practices, knowledge and attitudes related to HIV among Ontario dentists. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1996;24:412415.Google Scholar
13. Hudson-Davies, SCM, Jones, JM, Sarll, DW. Cross infection control in general dental practice: dentists' behaviour compared with their knowledge and opinions. British Dental Journal 1995;178:365369.Google Scholar
14. McCarthy, GM, Koval, JJ. Changes in dentist's infection control practices, knowledge and attitudes concerning HIV over a two year period. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1996;81:297302.Google Scholar
15. Lewis, DL, Boe, RK. Infection risks associated with current procedures for using high speed dental hand pieces. J Clin Microbiol 1992;30:401406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Epstein, JB, Rea, G, Sibau, L, Sherlock, CH. Assessing viral retention and elimination in rotary dental instruments. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126:8792.Google Scholar
17. Bentley, EM, Sarll, DW. Improvements in cross-infection control in general dental practice. Br Dent J 1995;179:1921.Google Scholar
18. Treasure, P, Treasure, ET. Survey of infection control procedures in New Zealand dental practices. Int Dent J 1994;44:342348.Google Scholar
19. American Dental Association. Infection control for the '90s: data reveals stringent infection control techniques practiced. ADA News Releases. 10 7, 1995.Google Scholar
20. Lloyd, L, Burke, FJ, Cheung, SW. Handpiece asepsis: a survey of the attitudes of dental practitioners. Br Dent J 1995;178:2327.Google Scholar
21. Williams, CO, Campbell, S, Henry, K, Collier, P. Variables influencing worker compliance with Universal Precautions in the emergency department. Am J Infect Control 1994;22:138148.Google Scholar
22. Cockroft, A, Elford, J. Clinical practice and the perceived importance of identifying high risk patients. J Hosp Infect 1994;28:127136.Google Scholar
23. Bauer, BJ, Kenney, JW. Adverse exposures and use of Universal Precautions among perinatal nurses. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 1993;22:429435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Beekmann, SE, Vlahov, D, Koziol, DE, McShalley, ED, Schmitt, JM, Henderson, DK. Temporal association between implementation of Universal Precautions and a sustained, progressive decrease in percutaneous exposures to blood. Clin Infect Dis 1994;18:562569.Google Scholar
25. Canadian Dental Association. Ottawa dentist faces charges of discrimination. Communiqué; 07 1995:7.Google Scholar
26. Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario. CDA, ODA and RCDSO clarify guidelines on Universal Precautions and the application of the human rights code. RCDSO Dispatch 1996;10(3):5.Google Scholar
27. McCarthy, GM, MacDonald, JK. A national study of infection control procedures of Canadian dentists. J Dent Res 1997;76. Abstract 2170.Google Scholar
28. Tokars, JI, Marcus, R, Culver, DH, et al. Surveillance of HIV-infection and zidovudine use among healthcare workers after occupational exposure to HIV-infected blood. Ann Intern Med 1993;118:913919.Google Scholar