Different Techniques for Rubber Dam Isolation: A Cross-Sectional Study
Abstract
Objective: To assess knowledge, regarding use of rubber dam during root canal treatment among dentists in Rawalpindi and Islamabad.
Study Design: Descriptive cross-section
Place and Duration of Study: Operative Department Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry (AFID) Rawalpindi from 1st March 2020 to 31st May 2020.
Materials and Methods: A web-based questionnaire, comprising of close-ended questions in the categories of demographics, clinical experience, usage of isolation techniques and knowledge regarding rubber dam (RD) use, procedures, and contraindications was sent through internet to 387 dentists of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. The response rate was 77.5%. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 20, and was displayed as numbers and percentages.
Results: 79 out of 300 i.e. 26.33% respondents used rubber dam in restorative and endodontic procedures. 73.3% were using other methods of isolation such as cotton rolls, saliva ejectors and high volume suction. All the respondents were aware about the importance of rubber dam. The most challenging factor for dentists (57.3%) was high influx of patients per day.
Conclusion: Rubber dam is not being used commonly by participating dentists of tertiary dental hospitals of Rawalpindi and Islamabad mainly because of high patient turnover per day, combination of cotton rolls and saliva high-volume ejector or gauze is the most common alternative to rubber dam isolation. Rubber dam isolation is highly recommended.
References
Wang Y, Li C, Yuan H, Wong MC, Zou J, Shi Z, et al. Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; 9: Cd009858.
Awooda E, Alwan M. Knowledge, Attitudes and Practice of Rubber Dam use among dentists working in private clinics in Khartoum City. Saudi J. Oral. Dent. Res. 2016; 1: 19-23.
Al-Amad SH, Awad MA, Edher FM, Shahramian K, Omran TA. The effect of rubber dam on atmospheric bacterial aerosols during restorative dentistry. Journal of infection and public health. 2017; 10: 195-200.
Tanwir A, Amin M, Choudhry Z, Naz F. Knowledge, attitude and perception of dental fraternity towards practice of rubber dam. Pak Oral Dent J. 2015; 35: 691-4.
Khan HR, Azam S, Qureshi B. Knowledge and attitude of house officers regarding rubber dam use. Pak Oral Dent J. 2018; 38: 97-101.
Winkler R. Kofferdam in Theorie und Praxis. Quintessenz-Verlag; 1991.
Rane AV, Thakur S, Thakur R. Rubber dam—an introduction. In Hydraulic Rubber Dam 2019 Jan 1 (pp. 1-9). William Andrew Publishing.
Ballal NV, Khandeelwal D, Saraswathi MV. Rubber dam in endodontics: An overview of recent advances. Int J Clin Dent. 2013; 6: 319-30.
Mackenzie L, Waplington M, Bonsor S. Splendid isolation: a practical guide to the use of rubber dam Part 1. Dental Update. 2020; 47: 548-58.
Wambier LM, Gonzaga CC, Chibinski A, Wambier DS, Farago PV, Loguercio AD, et al. Efficacy of a Light-cured Tetracainebased Anesthetic Gel for Rubber Dam Clamp Placement: A Triple-blind Randomized Clinical Trial. Operative dentistry. 2020; 45: E57-65.
Al-Omari WM. Survey of attitudes, materials and methods employed in endodontic treatment by general dental practitioners in North Jordan. BMC oral health. 2004; 4: 1-6.
Peciuliene V, Rimkuviene J, Aleksejuniene J, Haapasalo M, Drukteinis S, Maneliene R. Technical aspects of endodontic treatment procedures among Lithuanian general dental practitioners. Stomatologija. 2010; 12: 42–50.
Kapitan M, Sustová Z. The use of rubber dam among Czech dental practitioners. Acta Med (Hradec Kralove). 2011; 54:144–8.
Palmer NO, Ahmed M, Grieveson B. An investigation of current endodontic practice and training needs in primary care in the north west of England. Br Dent J. British Dental Journal. 2009; 206: E22.
Kaptan R, Haznedaroglu F, Kayahan M, Basturk F. An investigation of current endodontic practice in Turkey. The Scientific World Journal. 2012; 2012: 565413.
Ali A, Aslam A, Rehman B, Tariq A. Rubber dam use by general dental practitioners-prevalence and obstacles to its use. Pak Oral Dent J. 2016; 36: 468-71.
Anabtawi MF, Gilbert GH, Bauer MR, Reams G, Makhija SK, Benjamin PL, et al. Rubber dam use during root canal treatment: findings from The Dental Practice-Based Research Network. J Am Dent Assoc. 2013; 144: 179–86.
Madarati AA. Why dentists don't use rubber dam during endodontics and how to promote its usage? BMC Oral Health. 2016; 16: 1-10.
Younes LM, Doumani M, Al-Nahlawi TF, Alharbi AS, Habib A. Syrian Senior Dental Students' Perception, Educational Satisfaction, and Attitude Regarding the Usage of Rubber Dam. World. 2020; 11: 48.
Jameel A, Shah A, Iqbal M, Hussain M. An assessment of knowledge and usage of rubber dam among dentists in a Karachi sample. Pakistan Oral & Dental Journal. 2018; 38: 102.
Sauveur G. Improvement of the rubber dam frame. J. Endod. 1997; 23: 765-7.
Santos AE, Linhares FN, Leite MC, Escócio VA, Nunes RC. A new device to simulate the performance of rubber dams for dental applications. Polymer Testing. 2021; 94: 107043.
Loch C, Ratnayake J, Veerasamy A, Cathro P, Lee R, Brunton PA. Direct restorations, endodontics, and bleaching: materials and techniques used by general dentists of New Zealand. International journal of dentistry. 2019; 2019: 6327171.
Ng YL, Spratt D, Sriskantharajah S, Gulabivala K. Evaluation of protocols for field decontamination before bacterial sampling of root canals for contemporary microbiology techniques. Journal of Endodontics. 2003; 29: 317-20.
Compton J, Glass N, Fowler T. Evidence of selection bias and non-response bias in patient satisfaction surveys. The Iowa orthopaedic journal. 2019; 39: 195–201.
van Gelder MM, Bretveld RW, Roeleveld N. Web-based questionnaires: the future in epidemiology? Am J
Epidemiol. 2010; 172: 1292–8.
