Search

Intimate partner violence (IPV) may affect one to four million individuals per year in the United States, with women accounting for the majority of both reported and unreported cases. Dental professionals are in a unique position to identify many types of IPV because injuries to the head and neck may be indicators or predictors of IPV abuse. Fewer than half of dental programs surveyed have reported having IPV-specific curricula, and most dental students surveyed have reported having little experience or training to recognize IPV. Based on this information, this pilot study sought to assess the awareness and beliefs regarding IPV among first-year dental students at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Using a voluntary survey, followed by a one-hour educational seminar facilitated by an experienced IPV/domestic violence advocate, a post-seminar survey was administered to assess changes in student perceptions and beliefs and to determine the magnitude and direction of any changes. The survey had an 81.25 percent response rate (65/80). The results demonstrated that more than two-thirds of the students had no previous IPV-specific education. In addition, approximately half of these students began the educational session reporting they did not believe IPV was a health care issue, although the overwhelming majority had decided it was when surveyed after the seminar. Moreover, their perceptions and beliefs about the responsibilities of the dental professional, as well as knowledge about resources and available support services, were significantly changed. These results suggest that targeted, information-specific seminars may be sufficient to provide dental students with an understanding of the key issues regarding IPV. With this knowledge, they can better provide specific information about resources and referrals for services to their patients who have experienced IPV. Recommendations based on these findings are being used to develop and refine IPV-specific curricula at this institution, which may be of significant value to other dental schools with plans to develop and integrate this material into their programs.

Clinical experience indicates that newly available portable hand-held x-ray units provide advantages compared to traditional fixed properly installed and operated x-ray units in dental radiography. However, concern that hand-held x-ray units produce higher operator doses than fixed x-ray units has caused regulatory agencies to mandate requirements for use of hand-held units that go beyond those recommended by the manufacturer and can discourage the use of this technology. To assess the need for additional requirements, a hand-held x-ray unit and a pair of manikins were used to measure the dose to a simulated operator under two conditions: exposures made according to the manufacturer's recommendations and exposures made according to manufacturer's recommendation except for the removal of the x-ray unit's protective backscatter shield. Dose to the simulated operator was determined using an array of personal dosimeters and a pair of pressurized ion chambers. The results indicate that the dose to an operator of this equipment will be less than 0.6 mSv y⁻¹ if the device is used according to the manufacturer's recommendations. This suggests that doses to properly trained operators of well-designed, hand-held dental x-ray units will be below 1.0 mSv y⁻¹ (2% of the annual occupational dose limit) even if additional no additional operational requirements are established by regulatory agencies. This level of annual dose is similar to those reported as typical dental personnel using fixed x-ray units and appears to satisfy the ALARA principal for this class of occupational exposures.

Operator exposure to backscatter radiation while using an Aribex NOMAD radiation emitting device (a portable, self-contained, cordless, hand-held dental X-ray unit) was determined while the operator employed various typical and atypical use scenarios during the exposure of 715 digital and/or film-based dental radiographs and 200 study control exposures. Study data was compared to the radiation safety occupational exposure annual Maximum Permissive Dose (MPD) of 50 mSv (5000 mrem) to determine the possible exposure risk to an unprotected operator using this device. The results showed the reproductive organs received the highest dose and the thyroid the least. The average operator whole body dose for the study was determined to be 0.047 mSv (4.47 mrem) or 0.09% of the annual MPD. Extrapolating the data as an expression of averaged annual operator exposure resulted in a whole body dose of 0.4536 mSv (45.36 mrem) or 0.9% of the annual MPD, These results are well below established occupation exposure limits and are compatible with those published by the manufacturer.

A model curriculum for forensic dentistry in US dental schools has been presented. This curriculum follows guidelines that will provide the dental student with practical training in specific forensic techniques, knowledge of general principles of forensic dentistry, and an appreciation for the dentist's responsibility within the legal community.