The recent outbreak of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has quickly spread worldwide since its discovery in Wuhan city, China in December 2019. A comprehensive strategy, including surveillance, diagnostics, research, clinical treatment, and development of vaccines, is urgently needed to win the battle against COVID-19. The past three unprecedented outbreaks of emerging human coronavirus infections at the beginning of the 21st century have highlighted the importance of readily available, accurate, and rapid diagnostic technologies to contain emerging and re-emerging pandemics. Real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) based assays performed on respiratory specimens remain the gold standard for COVID-19 diagnostics. However, point-of-care technologies and serologic immunoassays are rapidly emerging with high sensitivity and specificity as well. Even though excellent techniques are available for the diagnosis of symptomatic patients with COVID-19 in well-equipped laboratories; critical gaps still remain in screening asymptomatic people who are in the incubation phase of the virus, as well as in the accurate determination of live viral shedding during convalescence to inform decisions for ending isolation. This review article aims to discuss the currently available laboratory methods and surveillance technologies available for the detection of COVID-19, their performance characteristics and highlight the gaps in current diagnostic capacity, and finally, propose potential solutions. We also summarize the specifications of the majority of the available commercial kits (PCR, EIA, and POC) for laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19.

Simulation training for invasive dental procedures is a core component of the pre-clinical dental curriculum. Besides conventional mannequin-based simulators, dental schools are now incorporating haptic virtual reality simulation (HVRS) devices to facilitate the transition of students from the simulated dental learning environment to the clinical settings. This study aimed to assess student performance and perceptions of HVRS training as a pedagogical tool in pre-clinical paediatric dentistry. After practicing the primary molar pulpotomy procedure on plastic teeth, participants were randomized into test and control groups. Test group students performed the same procedure on a HVRS device, namely the SIMtoCARE Dente^®. Subsequently, both the test and control group students attended another conventional pulpotomy simulation session where the quality of their access outline and pulp chamber deroofing steps were evaluated on plastic teeth. After the control group students also experienced the HVRS, all study participants completed a perception questionnaire on their experience. No significant differences were found between the study and control group students for the quantitative parameters assessed. Although the students regarded HVRS to be a useful adjunct to support their pre-clinical training, an overwhelming majority of the students did not consider HVRS to be a replacement for conventional pre-clinical simulation training.

We aimed to evaluate the impact of Virtual Reality Dental Simulators (VRDS) on preclinical training in endodontics for undergraduate dental students. Purposive sampling technique was used to target undergraduate dental students at two dental schools: in Qatar and Turkey. After training on endodontic access cavity preparation on upper anterior teeth using acrylic teeth on dental mannequins and virtual reality haptic dental simulator, a questionnaire based on a combination of open- and closed-ended items was distributed to the participants. The sample included 60 dental undergraduate students. The participants reported positive experiences with VRDS and 76% considered it to be helpful in improving their fine motor skills. Endodontic access cavity preparation on VRDS was perceived to be similar to natural and acrylic teeth by 73.34% and 53% of participants, respectively. Overall, 85% of participants supported the use of VRDS training to supplement conventional training on dental mannequins but also recommended the need for improvements in VRDS training in endodontics. The findings of this study underscore the benefits of VRDS in endodontics. Future research involving larger samples from multiple institutions may help to optimize VRDS in undergraduate dental education.

Background: The integration of haptic simulators in contemporary dental education has been reported to improve students’ hand-eye coordination and fine motor skills during pre-clinical education to facilitate a smooth transition to the clinical setting. The aim of this study was to assess the integration of haptic virtual reality simulation (HVRS) in undergraduate dental curricula in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Methods: All dental schools offering undergraduate dental programs in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries were invited to participate in this cross-sectional study design. Data was collected using an online survey on a voluntary basis and analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Results: Out of 34 dental schools, responses were received from 30 dental schools (response rate 88.2%). In terms of haptic integration, only two (6.7%) dental institutions have adopted haptic simulation in undergraduate dental education. However, a considerable proportion of schools (n = 13, 46.4%) expressed an interest in the future use of haptic technology. The key strengths of HRVS included the integration of modern technology, opportunities for self-directed learning, development and consolidation of manual skills, and boosting self-confidence amongst undergraduate dental students. Financial cost and limited patient cases in the HRVS library were regarded as the main barriers to widespread use of this technology. Conclusion: Although the Gulf Cooperation Council countries have strong economies with a high gross domestic product (GDP), only a limited number of dental schools have incorporated haptic technology in their curricula. Nevertheless, a high proportion of dental schools in the region are actively considering purchasing and implementation of haptic devices in undergraduate dental programs.

Background: In previous studies, COVID-19 complications were reported to be associated with periodontitis. Accordingly, this study was designed to test the hypothesis that a history of periodontal therapy could be associated with lower risk of COVID-19 complications. Methods: A case–control study was performed using the medical health records of COVID-19 patients in the State of Qatar between March 2020 and February 2021 and dental records between January 2017 and December 2021. Cases were defined as COVID-19 patients who suffered complications (death, ICU admissions and/or mechanical ventilation); controls were COVID-19 patients who recovered without major complications. Associations between a history of periodontal therapy and COVID-19 complications were analysed using logistic regression models adjusted for demographic and medical factors. Blood parameters were compared using Kruskal–Wallis test. Results: In total, 1,325 patients were included. Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) analysis revealed that non-treated periodontitis was associated with significant risk of need for mechanical ventilation (AOR = 3.91, 95% CI 1.21–12.57, p = 0.022) compared to periodontally healthy patients, while treated periodontitis was not (AOR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.25–6.58, p = 0.768). Blood analyses revealed that periodontitis patients with a history of periodontal therapy had significantly lower levels of D-dimer and Ferritin than non-treated periodontitis patients. Conclusion: Among COVID-19 patients with periodontal bone loss, only those that have not received periodontal therapy had higher risk of need for assisted ventilation. COVID-19 patients with a history of periodontal therapy were associated with significantly lower D-dimer levels than those without recent records of periodontal therapy. Clinical relevance: The fact that patients with treated periodontitis were less likely to suffer COVID-19 complications than non-treated ones further strengthen the hypothesis linking periodontitis to COVID-19 complications and suggests that managing periodontitis could help reduce the risk for COVID-19 complications, although future research is needed to verify this.

Background: Limited commercial LFA assays are available to provide a reliable quantitative measurement of the total binding antibody units (BAU/mL) against the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S-RBD). Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the fluorescence LFA FinecareTM 2019-nCoV S-RBD test along with its reader (Model No.: FS-113) against the following reference methods: (i) the FDA-approved GenScript surrogate virus-neutralizing assay (sVNT); and (ii) three highly performing automated immunoassays: BioMérieux VIDAS^®3, Ortho VITROS^®, and Mindray CL-900i^®. Methods: Plasma from 488 vaccinees was tested by all aforementioned assays. Fingerstick whole-blood samples from 156 vaccinees were also tested by FinecareTM. Results and conclusions: FinecareTM showed 100% specificity, as none of the pre-pandemic samples tested positive. Equivalent FinecareTM results were observed among the samples taken from fingerstick or plasma (Pearson correlation r = 0.9, p < 0.0001), suggesting that fingerstick samples are sufficient to quantitate the S-RBD BAU/mL. A moderate correlation was observed between FinecareTM and sVNT (r = 0.5, p < 0.0001), indicating that FinecareTM can be used for rapid prediction of the neutralizing antibody (nAb) post-vaccination. FinecareTM BAU results showed strong correlation with VIDAS^®3 (r = 0.6, p < 0.0001) and moderate correlation with VITROS^® (r = 0.5, p < 0.0001) and CL-900i^® (r = 0.4, p < 0.0001), suggesting that FinecareTM can be used as a surrogate for the advanced automated assays to measure S-RBD BAU/mL.