The purpose of this article is to present four new cases of peripheral osteoma of the mandibular condyle and the literature review. A retrospective study of files from our Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery over the last 6 years revealed four cases of peripheral osteomas located in the area of the mandibular condyle. Diagnostic procedure included clinical, radiographic, and histologic criteria. Gardner’s syndrome was excluded from patient history and clinical evaluation. One patient had only an aesthetic disturbance, with facial swelling, and the other three patients presented disturbances of the mandibular function, including deviation during mouth opening along with malocclusion. Three of the patients were male and one was female; all were of middle age (45–65 years old). The proposed surgical treatment was accepted by half of the patients, while the remaining half declined the operation after a confirmation of the diagnosis. Peripheral osteomas of the maxillofacial region are uncommon, and some cases with multiple osteomas are related to Gardner’s syndrome. An osteoma of the mandibular condyle is very rare and surgical treatment is challenging for the surgeon with regards to the approach selection and the related complications. In the two cases that accepted the proposed surgical treatment, no recurrence and no complication was observed.

Background: Workplace stress and burnout in the Greek healthcare system had been considered severe even before the high pressure of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to investigate occupational quality of life and burnout effects on workplace errors among the administrative staff in the Greek healthcare system. Methods: We enrolled 120 administrative healthcare employee participants between April and May 2019. Occupational burnout was assessed using the Maslach Burnout Inventory—Human Services Survey and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Findings: Inadequate staffing, a low sense of well-being, exhaustion, and low family income were associated with workplace errors. Increased workload and staff shortages were associated with occupation related quality of life. Conclusions: Targeted interventions supporting healthcare staff mental health are warranted. Application to Practice: Wellness and professional burnout can affect professional efficiency and are associated with workplace errors in the healthcare sector. Targeted interventions are warranted to support the mental health of healthcare staff during work and to prevent incidents of post-traumatic stress. Shortages of staffing may lead to an increase in the cost of the provided services.

Background: Third molar (M3) removal is considered one of the most frequent oral surgical procedures worldwide. Indications for extraction include both prophylactic and therapeutic reasons. However, this does not come without complications, and despite the widespread practice, there is no consensus on whether prophylactic M3 extraction is more beneficial than conservative management. Aims: The aim of this systematic review is to highlight and compare the main differences and outcomes between prophylactic and therapeutic removal of third molars with conservative treatment and observation. Several factors have been considered such as post-surgical infection risks and complications, hospitalization indications, economic factors and periodontal health of adjacent teeth. Methods: A literature review and meta-analysis were conducted, which comprises studies describing the incidence of postoperative complications, the periodontal status of the second molar (M2), the prevalence of caries, and the economic aspects of the M3 removal. Periodontal parameters of the adjacent teeth such as periodontal pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL), as well as inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) damage and post-operative inflammatory complications such as bacteremia, were considered. Finally, hospitalization and the economic burden of this procedure were also stated. Results: Third molar retention is associated with increased periodontal disease such as PPD and accumulation of plaque to the adjacent teeth, as well as risk of caries. Contrarily, prophylactic M3 extraction is often linked to unnecessary morbidity and costs, such as risk of bacteremia, trismus, postoperative pain, IAN damage, and sometimes the need for hospitalization. From an economic aspect, this frequent procedure is mostly associated with higher direct and indirect costs, which can exceed the amount of EUR 1000 per patient without hospitalization. Conclusions: This review tried to determine whether the M3 observation and retention can be more beneficial than M3 extraction, after examining certain parameters. Findings indicate that unnecessary morbidity and costs can be attributed to third molar extraction, with postoperative complications such as pain and trismus and sometimes the need for hospitalization. Transient bacteremia also accompanies third molar removal.