Objective
This controlled randomized clinical trial determined the whitening efficacy and the intensity and absolute risk of tooth sensitivity in dual whitening when prefilled at‐home whitening trays ...were used between in‐office whitening intervals.
Materials and Methods
An in‐office whitening agent containing 35% hydrogen peroxide was used. A prefilled tray with a whitening agent containing 6% hydrogen peroxide was used for at‐home whitening. Sixty‐six subjects were randomly assigned to three groups. Group I: at‐home whitening was performed 10 times between the in‐office whitening treatments. Group II: at‐home whitening was performed five times between the in‐office whitening treatments. Group III: only in‐office whitening was performed. The tooth color changes were evaluated using a spectrophotometer. A visual analog scale was used to express the pain intensity.
Results
All the groups showed increased ΔE*ab, ΔE00, and ΔWID with increased whitening sessions. Group I at the 3rd whitening session showed significantly higher ΔE*ab, ΔE00, and ΔWID than group III. Tooth sensitivity showed higher values up to 24 h after whitening.
Conclusions
Although dual whitening with the prefilled tray and in‐office whitening had higher whitening ability than in‐office whitening alone, the intensity and absolute risk of tooth sensitivity was similar.
Clinical Relevance
The dual whitening might produce faster and stronger whitening effects than in‐office whitening alone.
The economic and social shock presented by the Covid-19 pandemic is likely to reshape perceptions of individuals and organizations about work and occupations and result in both micro and macro shifts ...in the world of work. In this essay we focus on three occupationally-related domains that may be impacted by the pandemic. First, perceptions of the value and status of different occupations may change, resulting in both changes of occupational supply and demand (macro changes) and changes in the perceived calling and meaningfulness of different occupations (micro changes). Second, the great “work from home experiment” may change occupational perspectives on working from home. Organizations and researchers may be able to better understand which occupational and individual characteristics are associated with work-from-home effectiveness and better designate occupational groups and individuals to working (or not working) from home. Third, we discuss the increased segmentation of the labor market which allocate workers to “good jobs” and “bad jobs” and the contribution of occupational segmentation to inequality.
With the expansion of high-speed internet during the recent decades, a growing number of people are working from home. Yet there is no consensus on how working from home affects workers’ well-being ...in the literature. Using data from the 2010, 2012, and 2013 American Time Use Survey Well-Being Modules, this paper examines how subjective well-being varies among wage/salary workers between working at home and working in the workplace using individual fixed-effects models. We find that compared to working in the workplace, bringing work home on weekdays is associated with less happiness, and telework on weekdays or weekends/holidays is associated with more stress. The effect of working at home on subjective well-being also varies by parental status and gender. Parents, especially fathers, report a lower level of subjective well-being when working at home on weekdays but a higher level of subjective well-being when working at home on weekends/holidays. Non-parents’ subjective well-being does not vary much by where they work on weekdays, but on weekends/holidays childless males feel less painful whereas childless females feel more stressed when teleworking instead of working in the workplace. This paper provides new evidence on the impact of working at home and sheds lights for policy makers and employers to re-evaluate the benefits of telework.
New Zealand's early response to the novel coronavirus pandemic included a strict lockdown which eliminated community transmission of COVID-19. However, this success was not without cost, both ...economic and social. In our study, we examined the psychological wellbeing of New Zealanders during the COVID-19 lockdown when restrictions reduced social contact, limited recreation opportunities, and resulted in job losses and financial insecurity. We conducted an online panel survey of a demographically representative sample of 2010 adult New Zealanders in April 2020. The survey contained three standardised measures-the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), the GAD-7, and the Well-Being Index (WHO-5)-as well as questions designed specifically to measure family violence, suicidal ideation, and alcohol consumption. It also included items assessing positive aspects of the lockdown. Thirty percent of respondents reported moderate to severe psychological distress (K10), 16% moderate to high levels of anxiety, and 39% low wellbeing; well above baseline measures. Poorer outcomes were seen among young people and those who had lost jobs or had less work, those with poor health status, and who had past diagnoses of mental illness. Suicidal ideation was reported by 6%, with 2% reporting making plans for suicide and 2% reporting suicide attempts. Suicidality was highest in those aged 18-34. Just under 10% of participants had directly experienced some form of family harm over the lockdown period. However, not all consequences of the lockdown were negative, with 62% reporting 'silver linings', which included enjoying working from home, spending more time with family, and a quieter, less polluted environment. New Zealand's lockdown successfully eliminated COVID-19 from the community, but our results show this achievement brought a significant psychological toll. Although much of the debate about lockdown measures has focused on their economic effects, our findings emphasise the need to pay equal attention to their effects on psychological wellbeing.
Within the wake of the COVID‐19 pandemic, we investigate work‐nonwork boundary management among workers who transitioned to remote work. Based on five waves of data and a sample of 155 remote ...workers, we find that the preference for segmentation was associated with greater work‐nonwork balance. We also found that having a dedicated office space within the home and fewer household members was associated with greater work‐nonwork balance. However, these variables did not moderate the relationship between segmentation preferences and work‐nonwork balance as expected. We discuss implications for future research on boundary management processes and practices.
Existing knowledge on remote working can be questioned in an extraordinary pandemic context. We conducted a mixed‐methods investigation to explore the challenges experienced by remote workers at this ...time, as well as what virtual work characteristics and individual differences affect these challenges. In Study 1, from semi‐structured interviews with Chinese employees working from home in the early days of the pandemic, we identified four key remote work challenges (work‐home interference, ineffective communication, procrastination, and loneliness), as well as four virtual work characteristics that affected the experience of these challenges (social support, job autonomy, monitoring, and workload) and one key individual difference factor (workers’ self‐discipline). In Study 2, using survey data from 522 employees working at home during the pandemic, we found that virtual work characteristics linked to worker's performance and well‐being via the experienced challenges. Specifically, social support was positively correlated with lower levels of all remote working challenges; job autonomy negatively related to loneliness; workload and monitoring both linked to higher work‐home interference; and workload additionally linked to lower procrastination. Self‐discipline was a significant moderator of several of these relationships. We discuss the implications of our research for the pandemic and beyond.
The widespread and rapid social and economic changes from Covid-19 response might be expected to dramatically improve air quality. However, national monitoring data from the US Environmental ...Protection Agency for criteria pollutants (PM2.5, ozone, NO2, CO, PM10) provide inconsistent support for that expectation. Specifically, during stay-at-home orders, average PM2.5 levels were slightly higher (~10% of its multi-year interquartile range IQR) than expected; average ozone, NO2, CO, and PM10 levels were slightly lower (~30%, ~20%, ~27%, and ~1% of their IQR, respectively) than expected. The timing of peak anomaly, relative to the stay-at-home orders, varied by pollutant (ozone: 2 weeks before; NO2, CO: 3 weeks after; PM10: 2 weeks after); but, by 5–6 weeks after stay-at-home orders, the concentration anomalies appear to have ended. For PM2.5, ozone, CO, and PM10, no US state had lower-than-expected pollution levels for all weeks during stay-at-home-orders; for NO2, only Arizona had lower-than-expected levels for all weeks during stay-at-home orders. Our findings show that the enormous changes from the Covid-19 response have not lowered PM2.5 levels across the US beyond their normal range of variability; for ozone, NO2, CO, and PM10 concentrations were lowered but the reduction was modest and transient.
Display omitted
•Impacts of stay-at-home orders on air pollution were evaluated using EPA monitoring data from 100s of stations across the US.•During stay-at-home orders, ozone, NO2, CO and PM10 were lower and PM2.5 were higher than expected levels by 1%-30% of their IQR.•Concentration anomalies ended only 5-6 weeks after stay-at-home orders were issued.•Ozone, NO2, and CO concentrations returned to expected levels and PM2.5 and PM10 levels were higher than expected.•Reductions in ozone, NO2, and CO levels were modest and short-lived. PM10 levels did not change and PM2.5 levels increased.
Home hospital (HH) care is hospital-level substitutive care delivered at home for acutely ill patients who traditionally would be cared for in the hospital. Despite HH care programs operating ...successfully for years and scientific evidence of similar or better outcomes compared with bricks-and-mortar care, HH care outcomes in the United States for respiratory disease have not been evaluated.
Do outcomes differ between patients admitted to HH care with acute respiratory illness vs those with other acute general medical conditions?
This was a retrospective evaluation of prospectively collected data of patients admitted to HH care (2017-2021). We compared patients requiring admission with respiratory disease (asthma exacerbation 26%, acute exacerbation of COPD 33%, and non-COVID-19 pneumonia 41%) to all other patients admitted to HH care. During HH care, patients received two nurse and one physician visit daily, IV medications, advanced respiratory therapies, and continuous heart and respiratory rate monitoring. Main outcomes were acute and postacute health care use and safety.
We analyzed 1,031 patients; 24% were admitted for respiratory disease. Patients with and without respiratory disease were similar: mean age, 68 ± 17 years, 62% women, and 48% White. Patients with respiratory disease more often were active smokers (21% vs 9%; P < .001). Eighty percent of patients showed an FEV1 to FVC ratio of ≤ 70; 28% showed a severe or very severe obstructive pattern (n = 118). During HH care, patients with respiratory disease showed less health care use: length of stay (mean, 3.4 vs 4.6 days), laboratory orders (median, 0 vs 2), IV medication (43% vs 73%), and specialist consultation (2% vs 7%; P < .001 for all). Ninety-six percent of patients completed the full admission at home with no mortality in the respiratory group. Within 30 days of discharge, both groups showed similar readmission, ED presentation, and mortality rates.
HH care is as safe and effective for patients with acute respiratory disease as for those with other acute general medical conditions. If scaled, it can generate significant high-value capacity for health systems and communities, with opportunities to advance the complexity of care delivered.
The impacts of COVID-19 on workers and workplaces across the globe have been dramatic. This broad review of prior research rooted in work and organizational psychology, and related fields, is ...intended to make sense of the implications for employees, teams, and work organizations. This review and preview of relevant literatures focuses on (a) emergent changes in work practices (e.g., working from home, virtual teamwork) and (b) emergent changes for workers (e.g., social distancing, stress, and unemployment). In addition, potential moderating factors (demographic characteristics, individual differences, and organizational norms) are examined given the likelihood that COVID-19 will generate disparate effects. This broad-scope overview provides an integrative approach for considering the implications of COVID-19 for work, workers, and organizations while also identifying issues for future research and insights to inform solutions.
Public Significance Statement
COVID-19 has disrupted work and organizations across the globe. This overview integrates and applies prior research in work and organizational psychology as well as related fields in its examination of emergent changes for work practices as well as workers. This article also acknowledges and considers the disproportionate impacts that COVID-19 may have on workers depending on demographic characteristics, individual differences, and relevant organizational norms. In addition to helping make sense of the implications of COVID-19 for employees, teams, and work organizations, this review features roadmaps for future research and action.
PDF
