The COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected the human population by revealing many health problems, including within the oral cavity. This systematic review was designed to answer the question “Is there a relationship between oral manifestations and SARS-CoV-2 infection?”. Following the inclusion and exclusion criteria, twenty-seven studies were included (according to PRISMA statement guidelines). Based on the meta-analysis, nearly two-thirds of the SARS-CoV-2 positive patients reported oral symptoms, in particular taste alterations, xerostomia and ulcerations (54.73% [95% CI: 46.28–63.04%], 37.58% [95% CI: 26.35–49.53%], and 21.43% [95% CI: 13.17–31.06%], respectively). In conclusion, despite the conducted systematic review, the increased prevalence of oral manifestations in SARS-CoV-2 infection cannot be clearly established due to the possible association of other factors, e.g., individual or environmental factors.

Introduction and aim. The purpose of this study was to compare different Computerized-Controlled Local Anesthetic Delivery (CCLAD) systems to one another in addition to the conventional syringe. Material and method. The CCLAD systems chosen for this study are the Quicksleeper, SleeperOne, and The Wand. These are discussed in categorical objectives, including the following: duration of anesthesia, analgesic effect, locality; anxiolytic effect; advantages and disadvantages; comfort and safety of use; limitations. Analysis of the literature. The research found that many factors influence the effectiveness of dental injections, and the CCLAD systems are designed to reduce the ones that cause negative experiences. The injection systems are unique in their descriptions but show many similarities. Conclusion. The research concluded that each device has its advantages and disadvantages and that its efficiency depends on outlying factors, independent of the injection system used.

Our study aims to update knowledge about psychological distress and its changes in the Polish group of academic medical teachers after two years of a global pandemic. During the coronavirus disease, teachers were challenged to rapidly transition into remote teaching and adapt new assessment and evaluation systems for students, which might have been a completely novel situation that was not addressed before, especially in medical universities in Poland. We conducted a cross-sectional study at Poznan University of Medical Sciences from March to April 2022. The questionnaire included self-reported information on anxiety, stress, and depression. We found that post-pandemic levels of anxiety, stress, and depression have significantly (p<0.001) improved compared to initial levels at the beginning of coronavirus disease. In multivariate models, females had higher odds of improving levels of anxiety (OR = 0.46; 95% CI = -1.58–(-0.03); p = 0.04), stress (OR = 0.36; 95% CI = -1.83–(-0.22); p = 0.01), and depression (OR = 0.0.37; 95% CI = -1.58–(-0.12); p = 0.03). Anxiety, stress, or depression were not significantly associated with years of experience, the number of taught subjects, and weekly teaching hours, but only with the academic work during COVID-19 (Spearman r_anxiety = 0.37, r_stress = 0.32, r_depression = 0.37, p<0.001). For the virtual learning concerns, 79% of teachers reported that students might engage less; and it was correlated with higher weekly teaching hours (r = 0.19, p<0.05). Even though only 29.8% reported cheating as a concern, it was correlated with a higher number of taught subjects (r = 0.2, p<0.05). Levels of anxiety, stress, and depression have improved as time passed, not affecting teachers’ academic performance. Concerns about virtual learning have been raised, suggesting it may be conjoined with classroom learning but not as an alternative. Universities should highlight the importance of seeking psychological support and provide essential programs to employees. Teachers’ coping skills with psychological distress should be further studied.