The role of ergonomic saddle seats and magnification loupes in the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders. A systematic review

Despite numerous technical advances in recent years, many occupational health problems still persist in modern dentistry. These include percutaneous exposure incidents (PEI); exposure to infectious diseases (including bioaerosols), radiation, dental materials, and noise; musculoskeletal disorders; dermatitis and respiratory disorders; eye injuries; and psychological problems. PEI remain a particular concern, as there is an almost constant risk of exposure to serious infectious agents. Strategies to minimise PEI and their consequences should continue to be employed, including sound infection control practices, continuing education and hepatitis B immunisation. As part of any infection control protocols, dentists should continue to utilise personal protective measures and appropriate sterilisation or other high-level disinfection techniques. Aside from biological hazards, dentists continue to suffer a high prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), especially of the back, neck and shoulders. To fully understand the nature of these problems, further studies are needed to identify causative factors and other correlates of MSD. Continuing education and investigation of appropriate interventions to help reduce the prevalence of MSD and contact dermatitis are also needed. For these reasons, it is therefore important that dentists remain constantly informed regarding up-to-date measures on how to deal with newer technologies and dental materials.

The purpose of this study was to determine if the surgical operating microscope and/or dental loupes could enhance the practitioner's ability to locate the second mesiobuccal canal (MB2) canal of maxillary molars in an in vivo, clinical setting. The participating endodontists documented 312 cases of root canal therapy on maxillary first and second molars. Participants that used the microscope or dental loupes located the MB2 canal with a frequency of 57.4% and 55.3%, respectively. Those using no magnification located the MB2 canal with a frequency of 18.2%. When no magnification was used, significantly fewer MB2 canals were located based by Chi-square analysis at p < 0.01. There was no significant difference between the use of the microscope and dental loupes in the frequency of locating the MB2 canal. When the maxillary first molars were considered separately, the frequency of MB2 canal detection for the microscope, dental loupes, and no magnification groups was 71.1%, 62.5%, and 17.2%, respectively. The results of this study show that the use of magnification in combined groups leads to a MB2 detection rate approximately three times that of the nonmagnification group and that the use of no magnification results in the location of significantly fewer MB2 canals. Based on these results, more emphasis should be placed on the importance of using magnification for locating the MB2 canal.