Introduction

Use of lasers in health profession is not new as it dates back more than 100 years when this technology was first tested by Planck in 1900. Since then, there is no looking back, with these advancements being used in various sectors of health. These include removal of kidney stones in 1960s, tumor ablation, and for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia [1, 2].

Dentistry is evolving with the increased incorporation of lasers in this field, with dental specialties such as restorative, endodontics implantology, periodontics and pediatrics being benefited mainly [3]. Several investigations in different parts of the world have been conducted in order to acquire the level of awareness and perception of dentists as far as the application of lasers is concerned. Adequate amount of knowledge was observed among the Indian dental professionals when inquired about the use of various types of lasers and they supported its use in several dental procedures. However, there was a significant difference in the knowledge level among low and high experienced dentists and an overall need of improved training was demanded by some of these study participants [4, 5]. On the other hand, the attitude of Iranian dentists was found to be mixed, as they were more inclined towards the traditional procedures as compared to laser technology [6].

A few other studies have been done to assess the knowledge of dental professionals regarding specific dental procedures. It was noted in one of these studies that the dental professionals although being highly aware of laser use, showed lower level of attitude towards the use in endodontics. It is now a documented fact that the use of lasers in disinfecting root canals using laser photodynamic therapy is found to be affective [7, 8]. Finally, Brazilian dentists have also supported the efficiency of dental lasers used in detecting caries. Although the use of these measures is restricted to trained dental professionals only, the readiness of these dentists seem to be on the positive side [9].

Study hypotheses

Dentists in Riyadh have a limited exposure to dental lasers and their knowledge is inadequate as well.

Aims of the study

• To determine the current practice of Riyadh dentists towards the use of dental lasers
• To determine the knowledge of dentists in Riyadh about the different applications and types of dental lasers
• To compare the findings on the basis of work experience and professional designation
• To assess the factors associated with lack of laser use in dentistry

Materials and Methods

Study design

The present study is a cross-sectional one, that applied a close-ended questionnaire.

Questionnaire design

The researchers constructed the questionnaire online by Google forms. The questionnaire started with questions about demographics, such as gender, educational level, professional designation etc. Moreover, about knowledge level of dental lasers questions were asked, that included various kinds of lasers and their clinical uses, factors influencing using or not using lasers in dental procedures etc.

Research sample

The target of this study is the dental professionals of Riyadh city; hence, all dentists with the tendency to participate were required to complete the questionnaire. Totally, 500 Riyadh dentists were aimed to be involved in the present research. The survey was mainly sent by online communication such as social media. 

Validity and reliability of questionnaire

The experts in research, that included a few faculty members of REU received the questionnaire to confirm its validity. Considering the reliability, a pilot study was performed using 20 online questionnaires completed haphazardly by university students. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha in the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 19 was used to test the reliability.

Statistical analysis

After collection, the data was transferred to SPSS version 19 from Google sheets, where inferential as well as descriptive statistics were carried out. With the significance value kept under 0.05, comparisons were made between the groups .

Results and Discussion

A total of 344 participants filled up the online survey. Grouping of the participants was done based on their gender, which indicated that 62% (n=214) were males and 38% (n=130) were females (Figure 1). The participants were also grouped on the basis of their designation, which demonstrated that 68% (n=233) are general practitioners, 29% (n=100) are specialists and 3% (n=10) are consultants (Figure 2). Grouping of the participants was also performed based on their experience, which showed that 78% (n=266) have 1-3 years of experience, 16% (n=54) have 4-6 years of experience, 5% (n=16) have 7-10 years of experience and 2% (n=13) have more than 10 years of experience (Figure 3). Table 1 shows the comparison on the basis of gender, Table 2 compares the specialties and Table 3 the work experience.

Validity and reliability of the questionnaire

According to the experts in REU, we made minor changes to our questionnaire before we distributed it to the study participants. As far as the reliability is concerned, we performed Cronbach’s coefficient alpha in SPSS and the value retrieved was 0.80, which is acceptable to carry out the data collection after pilot study.

Table 1. Comparing the Research Participants Based on Gender

Table 2. Comparing the Research Participants based on Specialty

Table 3. Comparing the Research Participants based on Years of Experience