Abstract The current study aims to assess the effectiveness of e-learning in compliance with the new biosafety recommendations in dentistry in the context of COVID-19 applied to the clinical staff of a dental school in Brazil. A quasi-experimental epidemiological study was carried out by means of a structured, pre-tested online questionnaire, applied before and after an educational intervention, using an e-learning format. After data collection, statistical tests were performed. A total of 549 members of the clinical staff participated in the study in the two collection phases, with a return rate of 26.9%. After the e-learning stage, a reduction was found in the reported use of disposable gloves, protective goggles, and surgical masks. The course had no impact on the staff’s knowledge concerning the proper sequence for donning PPE and showed 100% effectiveness regarding proper PPE doffing sequence. Knowledge about avoiding procedures that generate aerosols in the clinical setting was improved. Despite the low rate of return, it can be concluded that online intervention alone was ineffective in significantly improving learning about the new clinical biosafety guidelines. Therefore, the use of hybrid teaching and repetitive training is highly recommended. elearning e COVID19 COVID 19 COVID-1 Brazil quasiexperimental quasi experimental structured pretested pre tested questionnaire format performed 54 phases 269 26 9 26.9% stage gloves goggles masks staffs s 100 improved guidelines Therefore recommended COVID1 1 COVID- 5 2 26.9 10 26.

ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate knowledge and attitudes towards biosafety recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic at a Brazilian dental school. Material and Methods A cross-sectional study was performed in 2020 with the clinical staff of a Brazilian dental school. The whole clinical staff was sent pre-tested self-administered online questionnaires about knowledge and attitudes towards the recommendations for biosafety in dental settings in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistical analyses were carried out for proportion calculation. Results Disposable head covering caps, isolation gowns, and gloves were the most frequently reported personal protective equipment (PPE). The rates ranged from 52.9% to 88.5% for N95 respirators, from 68.6% to 92.6% for face shields, from 47.4% to 67.5% for conventional eye protection shields, and 45.1% to 77.4% for eye protection with solid side shields. Chlorhexidine gluconate was the most frequent mouthwash indicated before clinical dental care. The percentage of agreement to provide clinical care to patients with suspected COVID-19 varied from 23.5% to 50.0%. The percentage of respondents who agreed that bioaerosol-generating procedures should be avoided was higher than 74.5%. Less than 50% knew the correct sequence for doffing of PPE. Conclusion This study revealed important gaps in knowledge and attitudes towards prevention and control measures against infection in dental environments in the context of COVID-19, indicating the need for improvements.

Um estudo retrospectivo foi realizado para avaliar fraturas faciais em pacientes atendidos no ano de 2000 em um hospital público de Belo Horizonte. As informações coletadas incluíam idade, sexo, etiologia, distribuição do trauma de acordo com o dia da semana e o mês, o local anatômico da fratura e o tratamento. As análises envolveram estatísticas descritivas, teste qui-quadrado, teste Bonferroni e análise de variância. Foram encontradas 1.326 fraturas de face em 911 pacientes. A maioria das fraturas ocorreu em adultos na faixa etária de 21 a 30 anos. Os homens foram mais acometidos do que as mulheres, numa proporção homem:mulher de 4,69:1. Os traumas causadores de fraturas faciais ocorreram predominantemente nos fins de semana. Os acidentes de moto e bicicleta foram a maior causa de trauma, seguidos por violência interpessoal, acidentes automobilísticos e quedas. Quando analisada a relação entre o gênero e a etiologia das fraturas de face, observou-se uma associação estatisticamente significativa entre essas variáveis (p < 0,001). Houve também uma associação entre a idade dos pacientes e a localização das fraturas (p = 0,0014). O osso facial mais fraturado foi a mandíbula, seguida por complexo zigomático e nariz. O tratamento conservador foi realizado na maioria dos casos. Houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre o tipo de tratamento instituído e a localização da fratura (p < 0,001).

A retrospective study was performed to assess facial fractures in patients treated at a public hospital in Belo Horizonte, in 2000. The data collected included age, gender, etiology, distribution of maxillofacial trauma considering day of the week and month, anatomic site of the fracture, and treatment. The analyses involved descriptive statistics and chi-squared test, Bonferroni test and analysis of variance. A total of 1,326 facial fractures were found in 911 patients. Most fractures occurred in adults with age ranging from 21 to 30 years. Men were more affected than women, with a male-female ratio of 4.69:1. Accidents causing facial fractures occurred predominantly on weekends. Bicycle and motorcycle accidents were the major cause of trauma, followed by interpersonal violence, automobile accidents, and falls. When the relation between the gender and the etiology of facial fractures was analyzed, a significant relation was noted between these variables (p < 0.001). There was also a relation between the patients' age and the site of the fractures (p = 0.0014). The mandible was found to be the most commonly fractured bone in the facial skeleton, followed by the zygomatic complex and the nose. A non-surgical approach was chosen in most cases. There were significant differences between the kind of treatment applied and the site of the fracture (p < 0.001).