Title: Awareness of Mercury Toxicity among Dental Students- A Survey Based Study
Authors: S. Sameer Mohideen Gani, Jayalakshmi. S
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v4i8.50
AIM: The aim of this research is to analyse the knowledge of dental students regarding the harmful effects of mercury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was designed with various questions about the harmful effects of mercury and was distributed among 100 students in various dental colleges in Chennai. Out of 100 students who responded to the survey 36 were male and 64 were female (fig.1) and 27 were CRRI’s, 26 were final year students and 47 were students from third year (fig.2). The students were questioned about the correct protocol for storage of mercury and disposal methods of scrap amalgam. They were also asked about the precautions to be taken while doing amalgam restorations and the correct ratio for mercury and alloy powder necessary to form amalgam. The results were tabulated and analysed. 1. Tveit AB & Espelid I (1992) Class II amalgam inter observer variations in replacement decisions and diagnosis of caries and crevices International Dental Journal 42(1) 12-18. 2. Diogo SJ (2003). Amalgam on trial. Retrieved May 30, 2005 from: www.agd.orgllibrary/2003/jan/200301-diogo.asp. 3. Diogo SJ (2003). Amalgam on trial. Retrieved May 30, 2005 from: www.agd.orgllibrary/2003/jan/200301-diogo.asp. 4. Forss H & Widstrom E (2004) Reasons for restorative therapy and the longevity of restorations in adults Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 62(2) 82-86. 5. Bogacki RE, Hunt RJ, del Aguila M & Smith WR (2002) Survival analysis of posterior restorations using an insurance claims database Operative Dentistry 27(5) 488-492. 6. Cook A (2006) Amalgam: Dead or alive? Dental Update 33(6) 94-98. 7. Wahl MJ, Schmitt MM, Overton DA & Gordon MK (2004) Prevalence of cusp fractures in teeth restored with amalgam and with resin based composite Journal of the American Dental Association 135(8) 1127-1132. 8. Berglund A (1990) Estimation by a 24-hour study of the daily dose of intra oral mercury vapor inhaled after release from dental amalgam Journal of Dental Research 69(10) 1646- 1651. 9. Molin M, Bergman B, Marklund SL, Schütz A & Skerfving S (1990) Mercury, selenium, and glutathione peroxidase before and after amalgam removal in man Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 48(3) 189-202. 10. Manhart J & Hickel R (1999) Esthetic compomer restorations in posterior teeth using a new all in one adhesive case presentation Journal of Esthetic Dentistry 11(5) 250-258. 11. Osborne JW & Albino JE (1999) Psychological and medical effects of mercury intake from dental amalgam. A status report for the American Journal of Dentistry American Journal of Dentistry 12(3) 151-156. 12. Mjör IA (1997) Selection of restorative materials in general dental practice in Sweden Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 55(1) 53-57. 13. Hickel R, Dasch W, Janda R, Tyas M & Anusavice K (1998) New direct restorative materials FDI Commission Project International Dental Journal 48(1) 3-16. 14. Khairuldean N & Sadig WM (1996) Amalgam safety and alternative restorative materials: A cross-sectional survey among dentists The Saudi Dental Journal 8(1) 27-33.Abstract
References