Search

Background: Despite the high prevalence of traumatic dental injuries (TDIs), parents generally lack awareness about dental trauma emergency management. This preliminary study's goal was to assess parents'/guardians' awareness of the treatment of tooth fractures/avulsion. Materials and Methods: A preformed questionnaire in e-format was sent to parents of school-going children. Kolmogorov–Smirnov test and Shapiro–Wilks's test were employed to test the normality of data. In addition, a Chi-square test was performed for quantitative variables. P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A response rate of 82.1% was achieved. Approximately 19.6% of parents reported dental injuries, with the majority (51.9%) occurring at home. In avulsion, 54.8% of parents believed that reinserting the tooth back into the socket was possible. For tooth fractures, 36.2% of parents believed that the fractured tooth could be glued. Tap water was preferred as a storage medium (43.3%). An insignificant association was observed with regard to storage media (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Inadequate understanding of the treatment of TDI by the primary caregiver leads to ineffective interventions at the scene of the accident and a poor prognosis for otherwise treatable cases.

Context: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is declared as a global pandemic by the WHO. Due to lack of proper vaccine, social distancing and restriction of movement in the form of“lockdown” have been implemented to curb the spread. This has crippled dental care in the country. Aims: The aim of this article is to highlight the management of endodontic emergencies during the COVID-19 lockdown phase. Settings and Design: Retrospective analysis of patient's data at a tertiary care center Materials and Methods: The data of 247 patients referred to the specialty clinic between March 23 and May 31, 2020, were retrospectively analyzed. COVID-19 risk assessment was performed for all the patients. Based on the diagnosis, the cases were classified as emergency, urgent, or nonemergency. The endodontic intervention was performed for all the emergency cases. Minimally invasive dentistry and pharmacotherapy were provided for urgent and nonemergency cases. Results: One hundred and seventeen patients presented with true endodontic emergencies (symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with or without apical periodontitis [80%], pulp necrosis and acute apical abscess [18%] or traumatic dental injury [2%]). About 82% of the emergency cases were managed by nonsurgical endodontic therapy, and vital pulp therapy was performed in 15.4% of the cases. Conclusions: Management of most of the endodontic emergencies required the use of aerosol-generating procedures. Irreversible pulpitis was the most common cause for the patients seeking emergency endodontic treatment.