We investigated the current status of institutional review boards (IRBs) that oversee research in dental hospitals. Eight hospitals, all of which had IRB, responded to our e-mail. The questions comprised two topics: IRBs and the clinical trials approved by them. The results showed that the average number of staff on IRBs of the 8 hospitals was 12.5. Furthermore, the proportion of dentists was the highest among the science committee members, with an average of 7.75, and the average number of non-dentists among the non-scientific members was 1.8. Regular IRBs convened meetings more than once a month, over the past year, or only if necessary.According to the approval status of clinical trials from 2016 to 2019, less than 50 studies accounted for 75%. The materials related to dental-implant procedures accounted for the highest quantity of materials used during clinical trials at 33.3%. The duration of 50% of the clinical trials ranged from more than 1 year to less than 2 years.Thus, based on the hypothesis that institutional reviews are currently conducted at dental hospitals and have raised issues and suggested improvements, we believe that IRBs will play an important role in dental hospitals, with more research conducted in dentistry in the future.

Among patients with di seases of dental 01' oral & maxillol'acial a reas, those who have pathologic lesions ta ke upon a considerable part of these pat ients , The accurate diagnosis is importa nt for the treatment of them Oral and max illofacial lesions may have specifi c characteristics associated with tooth, oral mucosa‘ sali vary gland itself and its devel opmental process, For histopathologic diagnosis of oral and maxill ofacial lesions . pa thologist s hould unde rstand pathogenesis, clinical features, radiographic appearance, treatment, and prognosis of the lesions. [n the hos pital that had oral surgeons on staff, but not an oral pathologist, they sent the pa thologic samples and requ ested the delïn itive diagnosis t。 the oral pathologist worked in th e other dental college hos pita l, Recently, however, it had been impossible for some reasons 80 they sent the samples to general pathologists worked in private clinical laboratory center, 8ince then, oral surgeons and their pati ents were occasionally suffered I'rom unreliabl e and even inacc ura te diagnoses and improper treatments We would like to review the cases that general pa thologists made wrong diagnosis and emphasize the necessity and importance of oral pathologists for oral surgeons.

본 연구는 치과병원에 내원 환자를 대상으로 방사선 검사 시 방사선피폭 인지도에 대한 관련요인을 분석하여 방사선피폭 인식의 변화를 위한 교육 자료를 만드는데 기초자료를 제공하기 위해 시도하였다. 방사선 장치 중 가장 방사선 피폭을 가장 많이 받는 검사에 대해서는 전체 65.5%로 CT가 가장 높았으며, 방사선 검사 시 피폭에 가장 민감한 부위에 대해서는 생식선 56.1% 가장 많았고, 방사선에 대한 정보 파악은 전체 26.3%가 TV나 신문을 통해 습득하는 것이 가장 많았다. 방사선 인식도, 방사선 유해성, 방사선 검사 시 심리상태, 방사선 피폭방지, 방사선 필요성에 대해서는 성 별간 남자가 더 높게 나타났으며, 통계학적으로는 유의한 차이가 있었다. 본 연구를 통해서 환자들로 하여금 방사선피폭에 대하여 올바르게 인식을 할 수 있도록 교육프로그램의 개발이 시급하며, 방사선사들에게는 환자의 피폭선량을 경감을 위한 세심한 배려가 필요하다고 하겠다. 또한 환자들은 방사선에 대해서 올바르게 인식하는 것이 촬영 시 불안감과 방사선피폭을 줄일 수 있을 것이다.