In this in vitro study, we compare the discoloration potential of three premixed calcium silicate cements, specifically EndoCem MTA Premixed, Bio-C Repair, and NeoPUTTY, when applied with or without two surface pretreatments (Nd-YAG laser irradiation or dentin-bonding agents). One hundred extracted human maxillary incisors were allocated into ten groups (n = 10), including the untreated control group. A standard access cavity was prepared in all teeth except the control group. Groups were formed according to the type of premixed calcium silicate cement used and the surface pretreatment applied to the internal surfaces of the cavities. Color measurements were taken with a VITA Easyshade Advance 5.0 spectrophotometer and converted to ΔE values using the CIEDE2000 formula at baseline (T0) and 7 (T1), 30 (T2), 90 (T3), and 180 (T4) days. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk test to assess normality, followed by the Friedman and Kruskal–Wallis tests for within- and between-group comparisons, respectively (α = 0.05). No statistically or clinically significant differences in ${∆\mathrm{E}}_{00}$ were detected among materials, surface treatments, or timepoints (p > 0.05). All mean ${∆\mathrm{E}}_{00}$ values remained below the perceptibility threshold (3.5). Within the limitations of this 180-day in vitro model, the tested materials showed favorable short-term color stability, and neither the Nd-YAG laser nor the dentin-bonding agents altered the outcomes. Long-term in vivo studies are required to recommend their clinical use in aesthetically critical areas.

Aims: COVID 19 emerged in December 2019 and was declared a global pandemic on March 11, 2020. Many countries postponed non urgent dental care, including routine endodontic visits from March 21, 2020. Restricted access to dental treatment and prolonged quarantine may trigger psychological distress. This study evaluated patients’ anxiety regarding emergency endodontic treatment during the pandemic. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was administered to 261 patients at the Department of Endodontics, Ordu University, between March 21 and December 21, 2021. Participants completed a 28-question anonymous questionnaire after providing written informed consent. Psychological distress was assessed using the Kessler 10 scale, and statistical analyses were performed with significance set at p

Purpose: The objective of this research was to assess the quality, substance, and ease of reading of online information regarding the use of 3D printing in dental practices. Materials and Methods: The search term selected was ‘3D printing in dentistry’. The first 100 websites retrieved through the Google Search Engine based on this search term were reviewed. Duplicate websites, scientific articles, social media links, videos, advertisements, and broken links were excluded from our study. The quality of the websites analyzed in this study was assessed using the DISCERN tool and JAMA benchmarks, while their readability was measured using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL). A significance level of p < 0.05 was established for the analysis. Results: The 75 websites reviewed were categorized into two groups: blogs and commercial sites. It was determined that commercial sites (N: 42) were the majority compared to blog websites (N: 33). Blog websites scored higher than commercial sites in the total DISCERN, DISCERN 1, and Q16 scores. In the JAMA criteria, the minimum sources criterion (n = 12) and the maximum authorship criterion (n = 71) were met. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of FRES and FKGL scores (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The quality of online information sources regarding ‘3D printers in dentistry’ worldwide is considered to be at a moderate level. The readability of the data is at a low level. There is a need for higher quality and highly readable websites about ‘3D printing in dentistry’.