4.6 Article

Carpal tunnel syndrome in dentists compared to other populations: A nationwide population-based study in Taiwan

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287351

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dentists have a lower risk of developing carpal tunnel syndrome compared to the general population, but a slightly higher risk compared to non-dentist healthcare professionals.
BackgroundDentists may be at a higher risk of developing carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) because of their use of frequent wrist and vibratory instruments at work; however, this issue remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted this study to clarify it. MethodsTaiwan National Health Insurance Research Database was used for this nationwide population-based study. We identified 11,084 dentists, 74,901 non-dentist healthcare professionals (HCPs), and identical number of age- and sex-matched participants from the general population. Participants who had the diagnosis of CTS before 2007 were excluded. Between 2007 and 2011, the risk of developing CTS among dentists, non-dentist HCPs, and the general population was compared by following their medical histories. ResultsThe cumulative incidence rate of CTS among dentists was 0.5% during the 5-year follow-up period. In dentists, the risk was higher in women (women: 0.7%; men: 0.4%) and older individuals (& GE;60 years: 1.0%; <60 years: 0.4%). After adjusting for age, sex, and underlying comorbidities, dentists had a lower risk of CTS than the general population (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.92). Dentists had a higher risk for CTS compared with non-dentist HCPs, although the difference was not statistically significant (AOR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.90-1.64). ConclusionsIn CTS, dentists had a lower risk than the general population and a trend of higher risk than non-dentist HCPs. The difference between dentists and non-dentist HCPs suggests that we should pay attention to dentists for potential occupational risk of this disease. However, further studies are warranted to better clarify it.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据