Effect of occupational exposure of dentists and healthcare personnel to electromagnetic fields on telomere length and DNA damage

Effect of occupational exposure of dentists and healthcare personnel to electromagnetic fields on telomere length and DNA damage | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Effect of occupational exposure of dentists and healthcare personnel to electromagnetic fields on telomere length and DNA damage Kardelen TUR, Salih VAROL, Tuğçe ERBAŞ, Dicle ASLAN, Fazile CANTÜRK TAN This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7300847/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted 11 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract As a result of technological advances, the number and variety of high-tech tools and devices used in routine dental practice have rapidly increased. There is a lack of research on the potential effects of these EMF-emitting devices. This study investigated the effects of occupational electromagnetic field exposure on telomere length and DNA damage in dentists and healthcare professionals. The study was conducted in two groups: control and exposure groups. The control group consisted of healthy volunteers (n = 7) not employed in dentistry, while the exposure groups consisted of 131 dentists and healthcare professionals working in the departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontics, prosthodontics, and restorative dentistry. Telomere length was assessed from serum samples, and DNA damage was assessed from lymphocytes. Power density (S) was measured in dental clinics. Electric and magnetic field values were calculated from the S value. When seven different clinics were compared, a significant increase in DNA damage and a significant decrease in telomere length were found (p < 0.05). The highest DNA damage and shortest telomeres were observed in the oral and maxillofacial surgery. Electromagnetic field values were also highest in the oral and maxillofacial surgery. Consequently, electromagnetic fields may pose a significant health risk to potentially exposed workers. Health sciences/Diseases Health sciences/Health care Health sciences/Health occupations Health sciences/Medical research Health sciences/Risk factors Electromagnetic field occupational exposure dentist effect telomere DNA damage Figures Figure 1 Introduction As a result of technological developments, high-tech medical instruments and devices have rapidly increased in number and variety. These tools emitting electromagnetic fields (EMFs) have become an indisputable and essential part of our daily life. For many years, groups like the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) have been organizing and conducting research on electrical appliances and electromagnetic fields. These organizations offer guidelines and suggestions about technology that have the potential to affect human life. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection have suggest EMF exposure can be detrimental and pose a risk to human health 1 . The increase usage of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and electromagnetic fields (EMF) emitting technologies using in the healthcare may lead to interactions between dentists and heathcare personnel that are above acceptable bounds 2 . Many electrically powered gadgets are utilized on a daily basis in dentistry clinical practice. Aerators, micromotors, laboratory-type micromotors, contra-angle, straight, and cavitrons, as well as light polymerization devices, reflectors, and ultrasonic cleaners are the most often utilized devices. Compared to many other medical specialties, the effects of EMFs on human health are believed to be more severe in the dental field since the EMF-generating devices are utilized close to the the craniocervical region. Exposure to EMFs from devices used in dental clinics may be considered to have little effect on patients due to the limited time and number of clinic visits for each patient. However, considering the application times, the effects on dentists and healthcare personnel is significant 2 . Medical sources of EMF created into two categories: sources of low-frequency, static fields (0 Hz–100 kHz) and sources of high-frequency fields (100 kHz–300 GHz). By magnetically inducing internal electric fields, a powerful enough low frequency EMF can stimulate sensory organs as well as nerve or muscle tissue. If the high-frequency EMF is strong enough, it can potentially result in tissue damage and overheating 3 . Dental tools are electrically network-connected devices that produce ELFs with power frequencies between 50 and 60 Hz 3 , 4 . More than three times the EMF of 1µT (microtesla), the IEEE-recommended EMF for use, can be produced by these electrical dental devices, according to recent observations 2 , 5 . Experimental studies have occasionally reported EMF hazards, such as inducing DNA damage 6 , 7 and apoptosis 8 . Epidemiological studies have also revealed a potential link between EMF exposure and an increased risk of diseases, including cancer 9 , neurodegenerative disease 10 , cardiovascular disease 11 , 12 or longevity and cellular senescence 13 . Descriptive rules and research on the potential adverse effects of these devices in routine clinical practice are lacking, nevertheless 14 . It is common to overlook the effects of EMFs caused by electrical devices utilized in clinical settings. The aim of the study was investigate the effects of occupational exposure of dentists and healthcare personnel to electromagnetic fields on telomere length and DNA damage. In addition, electric and magnetic fields were calculated by measuring power densities in dental clinics. Materials and methods Selection of subjects Ethical approval for this study was conducted with the decision of Erciyes University, Faculty of Medicine, Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Decision no: 2024/144 and date 28.02.2024). All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations by including a statement. The study was conducted in two groups: control and exposure groups. The control group consisted of healthy volunteers (n = 7) was selected from people aged 20–28 who were not working at the faculty of dentistry. The exposure groups consisted of 131 dentists and healthcare personnel working in the departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery (n = 29), endodontics (n = 17), orthodontics (n = 18), pedodontics (n = 18), periodontology (n = 15), prosthodontics (n = 23), restorative dentistry (n = 11) aged between 20–28 in the Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry. A questionnaire of demographic information A questionnaire was created to gather data on demographic factors like age, gender, chronic disease, family history of cancer, and lifestyle factors like smoking, and drinking. Power density value measure and e lectric and magnetic field calculation Power density value (S) was measured using the HF broadband meter-HF59B (Langenzenn, Germany) device from the corridor (control group) and the oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontology, prosthodontics, and restorative dentistry clinics (exposure group) for 6 minutes with two repetitions in 7 different areas in the Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry. After measuring with the antenna from different heights and distances, the optimum distance and height were selected. In all areas where the measurements were made, the antenna was placed at a height of 92 cm from the ground and 70 cm from the devices. Electric and magnetic field values were calculated from the S value using the following formulas: Electric field (E) calculation E: \(\:\sqrt{S\cdot\:n}\) E: Electric field intensity (V/m) S: Power density (W/m²) n: Free space impedance (377 Ω) E: \(\:\sqrt{S\cdot\:377}\) Magnetic field (M) calculation M: \(\:\sqrt{\frac{S}{n}}\) M: Magnetic field intensity (A/m) M: \(\:\sqrt{\frac{S}{377}}\) Evaluation of telomere length After obtaining consent from all groups, 2 ml of whole blood was collected containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as the anticoagulant. Telomere length from serum samples was evaluated using the Absolute Human Telomere Length Quantification qPCR Assay Kit (Science Cell, Carlsbad, USA). Telomere length was calculated using Cq values obtained from qPCR data. The ΔCq (TEL) value obtained with the telomere primer was calculated by subtracting the Cq value of the reference DNA from the Cq value of the test DNA. ΔCq(TEL) = Cq(TEL, isolated DNA sample) - Cq(TEL, reference DNA sample) The ΔCq (SCR) value obtained with the SCR primer was calculated similarly. ΔCq(SCR) = Cq(SCR, isolated DNA sample) - Cq(SCR, reference DNA sample) Then, the ΔΔCq value was obtained by taking the difference between these two values and telomere length was calculated. It was expressed as fold change with the formula 2 −ΔΔCq Relative telomere length of isolated DNA samples compared to the reference DNA sample (Fold) = 2 −ΔΔCq Total telomere length of DNA sample isolated per diploid cell = Telomere length of reference DNA sample × 2 −ΔΔCq Single cell gel electrophoresis Single cell gel electrophoresis (comet assay) was performed under alkaline conditions to detect single and double DNA strand breaks. The isolation of human lymphocytes was using Histopaque-1077 (10771, Sigma-Aldrich) from 3 ml of whole blood containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as the anticoagulant. Isolation was performed according to the manufacturer's product information sheet. The lymphocytes were used as a single cell suspension for the comet assay. The comet assay includes cell isolation, slide preparation, lysis, DNA resolution, electrophoresis, neutralization, staining, and evaluation 15 . Alkaline comet assay for blood was performed by modifying Bankoglu 16 . Slides were pre-coated with 0.5% normal melting agarose before one day. 100 µL of cell suspension was mixed with 500 µL of 0.8% lower melting point agarose and then quickly spread onto a glass microscope and slides covered coverslip. The slides were kept for about 10 min. solidify of agarose on the icebox. Then coverslips were gently removed, and the slides were placed into lysing solution (2.5 M NaCl, 100 mM EDTA, 10 mM Tris pH = 10, containing 10% DMSO and 1% Triton X-100) at least for 30 min at 4°C. The slides placed in the horizontal gel electrophoresis tank were held in an ice-cold electrophoresis solution (0.3 M NaOH, 1 mM EDTA, pH > 13) for 20 min, which allowed unwinding of DNA. Following electrophoresis, carried out at 25 V, 300 mA for 20 min, the slides were washed with neutralization buffer 16 . Finally, the slides were stained with 20 µg/ml of ethidium bromide for about 5 min and examined using the fluorescent microscope (Olympus BX51). The DNA tail that migrated from the cell head and caused the comet was a piece of DNA in lymphocyte nuclei. DNA stained with ethidium bromide was examined using a fluorescence microscope at a 200x magnification. With the aid of comet assay software (CASP, publiclly accessible, http://www.casp.of.pl , Wroclaw, Poland), 50 randomly chosen lymphocyte cell nuclei were examined. Damaged cells were classified as having tails. The length head (µm), length tail (µm), length comet (µm), head DNA (%), tail DNA (%), tail moment, and olive tail moment are the seven comet parameters used to describe DNA damage 15 . Statistical Assessment All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). The normality of the data was assessed separately using both the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. Since none of the variables exhibited a normal distribution, non-parametric methods were used throughout the analysis. Differences between groups were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis H test. When a statistically significant difference was detected, pairwise comparisons were carried out using the Mann-Whitney U test. Data were presented as median values due to the non-normal distribution of variables. To reduce the risk of type I error arising from multiple comparisons, Bonferroni correction was applied where necessary. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results The study was conducted on dentist and healthcare workers who were occupationally exposed to electromagnetic field (oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontology, prosthodontics, restorative dentistry) in the Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry and healthy volunteers who were not occupationally exposed to radiation. We were evaluated DNA damage and telomere length. Power density value (S) was measured and electric and magnetic field values ​​were calculated from S value in the dentistry clinics. A questionnaire of demographic information The questionnaire questions including demographic information of dentists and healthcare personnel workers and the number of respondents are given in Table 1. Electric and magnetic field The power density value (S) to be used in electric and magnetic field measurements was measured for 6 minutes with two repetitions from the corridor and from the oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontics, prosthodontics and restorative dentistry clinics. The antenna was placed at a height of 92 cm from the ground and 70 cm from the devices (Table 2). Power density values ​​varied significantly among clinics. The highest power density was measured as 1181.57 µw/m² in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. Pedodontics was 77.64 µw/m², endodontics was 55 µw/m², periodontics was 47.20 µw/m², prosthodontics was 59.59 µw/m², restorative dentistry was 57.65 µw/m², and orthodontics was 56.35 µw/m². The lowest power density was measured as 17.52 µw/m² in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment). The highest electric field values ​​were calculated as 667.25 µV/m in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. The values ​​were calculated as 171.17 µV/m in pedodontics, 144.38 µV/m in endodontics, 133.36 µV/m in periodontics, 149.93 µV/m in prosthodontics, 147.45 µV/m in restorative dental treatment, and 145.75 µV/m in orthodontics. The lowest electric field was calculated as 81.29 µV/m in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment). The highest magnetic field values ​​were calculated as 1.77 µA/m in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. Pedodontics were 0.45 µA/m, endodontics were 0.38 µA/m, periodontology were 0.35 µA/m, prosthodontics were 0.39 µA/m, restorative dental treatment were 0.39 µA/m, and orthodontics were 0.39 µA/m. The lowest magnetic field was calculated as 0.22 µA/m in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment). Telomer results Telomere length was assessed in dentists and healthcare personnel workers using the Absolute Human Telomere Length Quantification qPCR Assay Kit (ScienceCell, Carlsbad, USA). The average telomere length corresponding to each chromosome end was determined in kilobases (kb). Groups were compared according to the kit's reference value (Table 3). When evaluated according to the reference value of the kit used (52.26 kb), the average telomere length was evaluated as the lowest, 8.39 kb in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The average telomere length of endodontics 27.60 kb, periodontology 25.90 kb, pedodontics 15.39 kb, restorative dental treatment clinic 12.23 kb, prosthodontics 37.82 kb, and orthodontics 31.57 kb were evaluated. The lowest value was for restorative dental treatment clinic. ∆∆Cq values, thought to reflect telomere length, were compared among seven different dental clinics (Table 4, Garph 1). The Kruskal–Wallis test revealed a statistically significant difference between the groups (χ² = 61.95; p < 0.001). The Mann–Whitney U test was used for significant comparisons. The median ∆∆Cq value was highest in the oral and maxillofacial surgery group at 3.14. This group had a significantly higher ∆∆Cq value compared to the kit's reference value (Z = -3.86; p < 0.001). This finding suggests that surgical procedures may have negative effects on telomere integrity, possibly causing telomere shortening or stress. The median ∆∆Cq value in the restorative dentistry group was 2.25, which was statistically significantly higher than the kit's reference value (Z = -2.27; p = 0.023). This suggests that restorative procedures may also have an impact on telomere levels. In contrast, ∆∆Cq values in the pedodontics (1.58), endodontics (0.81), periodontology (1.01), prosthodontics (1.22), and orthodontics (0.96) groups were closer to the kit's reference value, and no significant difference was observed in these groups. These findings suggest that surgical and restorative procedures, in particular, can create significant biological stress on telomere structure and that this stress can be associated with an increase in telomere ∆∆Cq. This result supports the DNA damage findings obtained with the comet assay. Real-Time PCR with Telomere Primers (Amplification Curve and Melt Curve) The amplification curve showed that reactions using TEL primers transitioned to the logarithmic phase after the 20th cycle, demonstrating significant amplification. The amplification signal was strong and reproducible; the overlapping and parallel progression of the curves supported the technical accuracy and primer-specific efficiency of the experiment. The ΔRn (fluorescent signal) maximum was around ~ 5.5 million, indicating a high DNA amount and robust amplification. Early Cq values suggested that the telomere region has a high copy number due to the numerous repeats it contains and was therefore detectable in the early cycles. A single, intense peak was observed in the melt curve obtained with the telomere primers between 80–82°C. This indicated that the amplified product was specific and that no non-specific product or dimer formation was observed. The smooth and reproducible curves supported that the PCR conditions were optimized (Graph 2). Real-Time PCR Performed with SCR Primers (Amplification Curve and Melt Curve) In the amplification reaction with SCR primers, the curves began to rise at later cycles (approximately cycles 28–35). This indicated that the SCR target region was present in fewer copies in the genome and represented by a lower starting DNA amount compared to telomeres. The fluorescence intensity was lower than that of TEL (up to ~ 4 million), which may be due to the lower copy count of traditional reference genes. Because the amplification curves were smooth and sequential, the experiment's reliability was considered high. The melt curve obtained with the SCR primers contained an intense peak around 80–82°C. The similar melting temperature of the telomere primers indicated that both reactions were run under similar PCR conditions and that no specificity issues were encountered. The presence of a single major peak indicated that specific amplification was successful and no non-specific product was formed (Graph 3). DNA damage results Head length, tail length, comet length, head DNA, tail DNA, TM, and OTM values measured with the comet assay were compared among eight different groups. According to the Kruskal–Wallis test, statistically significant differences were found between the groups for all parameters (p < 0.001). Pairwise comparisons for significant variables were made using the Mann–Whitney U test (Table 5). Head length values were highest in the control group (407.00), while significant decreases were found in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (207.00), pedodontics (200.00), and orthodontics (328.00) groups (Graph 4). Regarding tail length (Graph 5), values increased in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (214.5), restorative (266.0), and prosthodontics (175.00) groups, while this value remained significantly lower in the control group (58.00). The comet length parameter was found to be highest in the restorative dentistry group (679.0), but the most striking differences were seen in variables such as OTM and tail DNA, which more accurately reflect overall DNA damage, in the oral and maxillofacial surgery group (Graph 6). While the head DNA ratio was 97.0 in the control group, significant decreases were noted in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (74.0), pedodontics (82.0), and endodontics (87.0) groups (Graph 7). This can indicate a decrease in the proportion of intact DNA. Tail DNA was found to be high in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (27.0), pedodontics (18.0), and restorative dentistry (21.0) groups, but was measured at only 3.0 in the control group (Graph 8). TM (Graph 9) and OTM (Graph 10) values, which reflect the extent and intensity of DNA damage, were highest in the oral and maxillofacial surgery group (58.0 and 38.0, respectively). These results indicate that the oral and maxillofacial surgery group had the highest DNA damage across all parameters. Conversely, the periodontology group had the least DNA damage after the control group. In this group, tail DNA (7.0), OTM (11.0), and TM (7.0) values were lower than in the other intervention groups. Head DNA values were also found to be high (93.0). These results suggest that the periodontology group could relatively more protected in terms of DNA integrity (Table 5). Discussion Many researchers have hypothesized that exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) may be linked to long-term health issues. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) categorized both RF and ELF (magnetic fields) as category 2B, potentially harmful to humans, based on the available scientific data 17 , 18 . Additionally, the IARC advisory council debated reclassifying RFR as a Group 1 carcinogen in April 2019 19 . Human EMF effects are mostly brought on by extended exposure. However, each person's exposure time is different, and not all illnesses are brought on by the same exposure 20 , 21 . Guidelines for the general public prepared by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection limit EMF exposure to 200 micro-Teslas (µT) at 60 Hz for any given period of time to prevent effects on nervous system function 1 . When a low frequency electromagnetic field is powerful enough, it can magnetically induce internal electric fields that stimulate nerve or muscle tissue as well as sensory organs. Additionally, it might result in tissue damage and overheating when the high-frequency EMF is strong enough 3 . Aldad et al. demonstrated that exposure to radiofrequency radiation at frequencies between 800 and 1900 MHz results in behavioral and neurophysiological changes that persist into adulthood. Mice exposed to radiofrequency radiation during pregnancy exhibited memory impairment, hyperactivity, and anxiety, suggesting that in utero radiofrequency exposure is a potential cause of neurological disorders 22 . Pregnancy is specifically deemed to be at higher risk under the European Directive 23 . Hosseinabadi et al. investigated that how power plant workers' stress, anxiety, depression, and sleep quality were affected by long-term exposure to ELF-EMF. Compared to the unexposed group, the exposed workers' sleep quality was noticeably worse. Additionally, the exposed group experienced more severe depression than the unexposed group. Stress, depression, and anxiety were directly and significantly correlated with higher ELF-EMF exposure. Compared to the other groups, the technicians who had the most exposure had much worse sleep quality. According to this study, prolonged exposure to ELF-EMF at work may cause worry, stress, sadness, and poor sleep 24 . Epidemiologic research suggests that exposure to ELF-EMF is associated with an increased risk of miscarriage, Alzheimer's disease (AD), and pediatric cancer. However, the ELF-EMF does not appear to increase the risk of adult cancer. Furthermore, there is no solid proof that exposure to ELF-EMF causes cardiovascular disease mortality 25 . According to Shapira et al., young military personnel who were exposed to non-ionizing radiation did not have a higher short-term risk of developing cancer than young adults who were not exposed 26 . In routine dentistry clinical, aerators, micromotors, laboratory-type micromotors, contra-angle, straight, and cavitrons, as well as light polymerization devices, reflectors, and ultrasonic cleaners, are the most often utilized devices. In dentistry clinical, these tools are utilized in tandem on a daily basis. As a result, the EMF emitted by each device combines and a more intense electromagnetic environment is formed in total. Even if the patient's stay at the dental unit is only a few minutes, on an average workday, the dentist and other dental staff who share the same workspace may be exposed to this electromagnetic field for hours. Also, dental students are exposure to ELF-MF during dentistry training 4 , 27 . Dental students undergo a learning process that is closely intertwined with the use of devices emitting electromagnetic fields (EMFs) during both preclinical and clinical training. Exposure to EMFs in preclinical laboratories as well as during clinical internships constitutes a significant public health concern that is often overlooked within academic settings. Compared to other medical disciplines, dental practice may carry a higher risk due to the prolonged duration and localized intensity of EMF exposure. 2 Direct application of electromagnetic fields to the craniocervical region may lead to more pronounced potential effects on the central nervous system and surrounding structures. Although patients are assumed to be less exposed due to their short clinical time, the effects of exposure on dentists and allied health personnel who work with these devices for extended periods require further investigation. Even though the EMF's impacts aren't typically thought of as acute, they are known to build up over time and show up. We measured power density value (S) in dental clinics. Electric and magnetic field values ​​were calculated from S value. The S value was 17.52 µw/m² of control (coridor). The oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic were highest measured as 1181.57 µw/m² in pedodontics was 77.64 µw/m², endodontics was 55 µw/m², periodontology was 47.20 µw/m², prosthodontics was 59.59 µw/m², restorative dentistry was 57.65 µw/m², and orthodontics was 56.35 µw/m² measured. The highest electric field values ​​were calculated as 667.25 µV/m in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. The values ​​were calculated as 171.17 µV/m in pedodontics, 144.38 µV/m in endodontics, 133.36 µV/m in periodontology, 149.93 µV/m in prosthodontics, 147.45 µV/m in restorative dentistry, and 145.75 µV/m in orthodontics. The lowest electric field was calculated as 81.29 µV/m in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment). The highest magnetic field values ​​were calculated as 1.77 µA/m in the oral, dental, and maxillofacial surgery clinic. Pedodontics was calculated as 0.45 µA/m, endodontics as 0.38 µA/m, periodontics as 0.35 µA/m, prosthodontics as 0.39 µA/m, restorative dental treatment as 0.39 µA/m, and orthodontics as 0.39 µA/m. The lowest magnetic field was calculated as 0.22 µA/m in the corridor (outside the clinic). Our findings are similar to those in the studies by Huang and Kim 4 , 27 . Bulut et al. showed that all dental devices' ELF-MF readings above the 2 mG (0.2 µT, 50 Hz) danger limit for prolonged exposure 28 . Huang et al. suggested that dentists may be over exposed to power frequency ELF-MF. Furthermore, in locations where dentists typically treat patients, some dental equipment may generate ELF-MF levels higher than 0.4 µT 27 . Kim et al. showed that the average MF exposure level of 10 endodontic dentists was 0.03 µT. According to the research, endodontic dentists had a lower average EMF exposure than other hospital staff. The International Committee on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection's suggested maximum acute exposure limit of 200 µT for worker protection against ELF-EMFs was significantly higher than any of the observed exposure levels. Although high levels of exposure occurred in the operating room and x-ray room, the MF exposure level for endodontic dentist during routine endodontic work was minimal. However, comparatively significant exposure levels were found in an operating room and x-ray room, most likely due to the usage of surgical instruments like monitors and microscopes, as well as different motors and power cables of x-ray machines with high current flows 4 . There are limited publications and studies on dentists' exposure to electromagnetic fields, indicating that the effects of EMFs caused by electrical devices used in dental clinical environments are underestimated. Mortazavi et al., showed that dentists' serum cortisol levels can be lowered by the electromagnetic fields generated by magnetostrictive cavitrons 29 . Ouyang et al., exposure to non-ionizing radiation emitted by blue light and UV light (ultraviolet) used in dentistry can damage various structures of the eye, including the retina and cornea 30 . We evaluated the telomere length of dentists and healthcare personnel occupationally exposed to electromagnetic fields. Based on the kit's reference value (52.26 kb), the mean telomere length was lowest in oral and maxillofacial surgery, at 8.39 kb. Oral and maxillofacial surgery, the clinic with the highest EMF exposure, is an environment where high-frequency micromotors, electrocautery devices, and lighting systems are frequently used. Endodontics (27.60 kb), periodontics (25.90 kb), and pedodontics (15.39 kb). Although EMF sources are concentrated in these clinics, the exposure level was assessed as lower due to factors such as frequency of use, distance from the device to the operator, and duration of use. In endodontics, in particular, devices used are often operated for short periods. Telomere length was lowest in restorative dentistry clinics, at 12.23 kb. The prosthodontics was 37.81 kb and the orthodontic size was 31.57 kb. The higher values ​​may have been due to factors such as the desk-type devices and the greater distance between the personnel and the device. These results are also supported by studies by Fan et al. and Li et al. Fan et al. showed in their study on mouse breast cancer cell line that static magnetic field treatment shortens telomere length, reduces telomerase activity and inhibits the expression of telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT). Li et al. show that telomerase expression can be increased after 138 days of exposure to 1800 MHz electromagnetic radiation (EMR) in NIH/3T3 cells 31 , 32 . Comet results showed that EMFs caused more DNA damage in the oral and maxillofacial surgery. These findings suggest that EMF exposure disrupts DNA integrity, producing double- and single-strand breaks. Oral and maxillofacial surgery personnel were found to have higher DNA damage compared to other clinics. The electric and magnetic field values ​​of the devices used in oral and maxillofacial surgery (high-speed surgical micromotors, electrocautery, reflector systems, and light sources) were measured at higher values ​​than in other clinics. It can be suggested that higher EMF values ​​cause DNA strand breaks. Hosseinabadi et al. showed that long-term occupational exposure to ELF-EMF among power plant workers were significantly higher in the exposed group compared to the unexposed group comet parameter. Long-term exposure to ELF-EMFs at work may be likely to have genotoxic effects 33 . Certain genes may be impacted by ELF-EMFs, whereas others may not be significantly impacted. Mahaki et al. (2019a) demonstrated that after two months of exposure to ELF-EMFs, the expression levels of retinoid-related orphan receptor alpha (RORα), signal transducer and activator of transcription 6 (STAT6), and transcription factor Maf (c-Maf) in the rat spleen were significantly decreased 34 . The utility workers' occupational exposure levels to ELF-MF were below the threshold limit values (TLV) that the American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) recommends. DNA strand breaks may result from exposure to ELF-MF at concentrations below the ACGIH exposure limit 35 . Based on the literature and after consulting staff, healthcare professionals' knowledge of risks and safety precautions needed to be improved and that clear, evidence-based information from reliable sources was needed and that it should be clear to the user which source to refer to 36 . There are data suggesting that EMF can alter gene expression at the epigenetic level and increase the risk of certain chronic diseases, including cancer. Therefore, the biological effects of non-ionizing radiation should be evaluated not only through short-term physical complaints but also through long-term systemic effects 37 . Dentists and healthcare professionals working in clinics with high power density, electric and magnetic fields were evaluated to have shorter telomeres and higher DNA damage. Understanding the biological effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) is essential not only for the safe use of existing devices but also for the safer design of emerging technologies. Incorporating risk–benefit analyses of EMF exposure and mitigating the potential harms of non-ionizing radiation should be regarded as integral components of health policies and occupational safety regulations. In the integration of new technologies, risk assessments should extend beyond considerations of mechanical efficiency and economic cost to include long-term biological effects as well as implications for occupational health and safety. Moreover, the risk is not confined to the device itself; environmental factors—such as the number of devices, duration of operation, room size, ventilation systems, and reflective surfaces—also play a critical role in determining exposure levels. Therefore, managing electromagnetic field exposure should require a multidisciplinary approach that incorporates the combined contributions of engineering, occupational health and safety, and clinical sciences. On the other hand, healthcare workers' knowledge levels and protective behaviors regarding EMF exposure are also a significant topic of discussion. A study by Mild et al. (2019) reported that healthcare workers' knowledge of the biological effects of EMFs and safety measures is low and that their awareness needs to be increased 36 . The study emphasized that users lack access to reliable sources and that the available information is often technical, fragmented, and lacks practical application. This can lead to workers being unprotected and underestimating occupational risks. Furthermore, definitive guidelines and research on the potential adverse effects of these devices in routine clinical practice are lacking 14 , 38 . It is common to overlook the effects of EMFs caused by electrical devices used in clinical settings. This study has certain limitations that should be considered. The respondents belong only to the Erciyes University, Faculty of Dentistry population. The cross-sectional design provides valuable associations but does not allow firm conclusions regarding causality. In addition, the control group size was relatively small compared to the exposed groups, which may affect generalizability. Environmental factors such as room size, ventilation, and duration of exposure could not be fully standardized, and individual lifestyle differences may also have influenced the results. Despite these limitations, the findings highlight important associations that warrant confirmation in larger, multicenter, and longitudinal studies. Conclusion The rapid proliferation of new diagnostic and therapeutic technologies offers significant benefits but may also carry potential health risks if appropriate precautions are not observed. Electromagnetic fields represent one such factor that warrants attention, as they may contribute to occupational exposure among healthcare professionals. Adhering to recommended exposure limits for non-ionizing radiation is therefore essential. At the same time, further research is needed to clarify the long-term health effects of electromagnetic fields and to better evaluate their potential risks and benefits. Within this context, the integration of such technologies into routine dental practice should be accompanied by heightened awareness and preventive measures, ensuring that both dentists and allied healthcare personnel are adequately informed about possible occupational risks. This study is of clinical importance for dentists, healthcare personnel, and dental students to gain knowledge about radiation protection measures to overcome the harmful effects of radiation during their clinical practice. Declarations Funding: No funding Author Contribution F.C.T. was responsible for the study design and writing of the article. K.T. and S.V. performed analyses of DNA damage and telomere length. K.T. and T.E. were measuring electric and magnetic fields. D.A. was responsible for the statistical analysis of the data. Acknowledgement The financial support from Erciyes University—The Scientific Research Projects of Turkey (ERUBAP); Project number: TYL-2024-13785 Data Availability The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. References International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Principles for non-ionizing radiation protection. Health Phys. 118 , 477-482 (2020). Guven, M., Eroglu, E. & Comlekci, S. Electromagnetic Fields in Dental Clinics. Am. J. Biomed. Sci. & Res. 13 , 502-503 (2021). Stam, R. & Yamaguchi-Sekino, S. Occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields from medical sources. Ind. Health 56, 96-105 (2018). Kim, D. W., Choi, J. L., Kwon, M. K., Nam, T. J. & Lee, S. J. Assessment of daily exposure of endodontic personnel to extremely low frequency magnetic fields. Int. Endod. J. 45 , 744-748 (2012). Eroglu, E., Erken, M., Gecin, M., Demirekin, Z. & Comlekci, S. Kamu Ağız Diş Sağlığı Kliniklerinde Elektromanyetik Alanlar; Isparta, Türkiye. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 10, 129-136 (2019). Lai, H. Genetic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. Electromagn. Biol. Med . 40, 264-273 (2021). Sun, C. et al. Inhibition of mitochondrial calcium uptake by Ru360 enhances the effect of 1800 MHz radio-frequency electromagnetic fields on DNA damage. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 264 , (2023). Rain, B. D., Plourde-Kelly, A. D., Lafrenie, R. M. & Dotta, B. T. Induction of Apoptosis in B16-BL6 Melanoma Cells Following Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields Modelled after Intercellular Calcium Waves. FEBS Open Bio. 14, 515-524 (2023). Zhang, Y. et al. Mobile phone use and risks of overall and 25 site-specific cancers: a prospective study from the UK biobank study. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 33 , 88-95 (2024). Sorahan, T. & Nichols, L. Motor neuron disease risk and magnetic field exposures. Occup. Med. 72 , 184-190 (2022). Chai, Z., Wang, Y., Li, Y. M., Zhao, Z. G. & Chen, M. Correlations between geomagnetic field and global occurrence of cardiovascular diseases: evidence from 204 territories in different latitude. BMC Public Health 23 , 1771 (2023). Parizek, D. et al. Electromagnetic fields-do they pose a cardiovascular risk? Physiol. Res. 72 , 199-208 (2023). Wei, X., Huang, Y. & Sun, C. A review of effects of electromagnetic fields on ageing and ageing dependent bioeffects of electromagnetic fields. Sci. Total Environ. 963, (2025). Kameda, T. & Ohkuma, K. Electromagnetic fields from dental devices and their effects on human health. J. Electr. Electron. Syst. 3 , 118 (2014). Baran, M. et al. Hepatotoxicity and renal toxicity induced by radiation and the protective effect of quercetin in male albino rats. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 98, 1473-1483 (2022). Bankoglu, E. E., Schuele, C. & Stopper, H. Cell survival after DNA damage in the comet assay. Arch. Toxicol. 95, 3803-3813 (2021). IARC. Non-ionizing radiation, Part 1: Static and extremely low-frequency (ELF) electric and magnetic fields. IARC Monogr. Eval. Carcinog. Risks Hum. 80, 1-395 (2002). IARC. Non-ionizing radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. IARC Monogr. Eval. Carcinog. Risks Hum . 102, 1-460 (2013). IARC. Animal Studies Prompt Calls To Upgrade Classification to “Probably Carcinogenic” or Higher. https://microwavenews.com/short-takes-archive/iarc-urged-reassess-rf (2019). Belyaev, I. et al. Europaem Emf Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Reviews on Environmental Health 31, 363-397 (2016). Ilhan, M., Erkan, V. & Col, M. Electromagnetic field mapping and health status of workers exposed to electromagnetic fields in a university hospital. Review of health and social policy 1 , 51-58 (2017). Aldad, T.S., Gan, G., Gao, X.B., Hugh S. Taylor, H.S. Fetal radiofrequency radiation exposure from 800-1900 Mhz-rated cellular telephones affects neurodevelopment and behavior in mice. Scıentıfıc Reports 2 : 312 (2012). European Commission. Non-binding guide to good practice for implementing Directive 2013/35/EU. Electromagnetic Fields Volume 1, Practical Guide (2014). Bagheri-Hosseinabadi, M., Khanjani, N., Ebrahimi, M. H., Haji, B. & Abdolahfard, M. The effect of chronic exposure to extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields on sleep quality, stress, depression and anxiety . Electromagn. Biol. Med . 38, 96-101 (2019). Karimi, A., Ghadiri-Moghaddam, F. & Valipour, M. Insights in the biology of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields exposure on human health. Mol. Biol. Rep. 47, 5621-5633 (2020). Shapira, S. et al. Occupational Exposure to Nonionizing Radiation and Risk for Malignancy in Young Adults. Mil. Med. 188, e2424-e2430 (2023). Huang, S. M. et al. Occupational Exposure of Dentists to Extremely-low-frequencyMagnetic Field . J. Occup. Health 53, 130-136 (2011). Bulut, A., Fırlarer, A. & Karamuftuoglu, N. Occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields from dental devices: A descriptive study. Turk. J. Public Health 21, 403-411 (2023). Mortazavi, S. M., Vazife-Doost, S., Yaghooti, M., Mehdizadeh, S. & Rajaie-Far, A. Occupational exposure of dentists to electromagnetic fields produced by magnetostrictive cavitrons alters the serum cortisol level. J. Nat. Sci. Biol. Med. 3, 60-64 (2012). Ouyang, X. et al. Mechanisms of blue light-induced eye hazard and protective measures: a review. Biomed. Pharmacother. 130, 110577 (2020). Fan, Z., Hu, P., Xiang, L., Liu, Y., He, R., Tao Lu, T. A static magnetic field ınhibits the migration and telomerase function of mouse breast cancer cells. Biomed Res Int. 11, 7472618 (2020). Li, B.Y., M.-L. Wang, M.L., Liu, Q.L., Q.-X. Hou, Q.X., Liu, H. The effect of 1800 MHz electromagnetic radiation on telomerase expression in NIH/3T3 cells. Medicine Sciences and Bioengineering Book Chapter, 1st Edition, pages 4 (2015) Bagheri-Hosseinabadi, M., Khanjani, N., Mirzaii, M., Norouzi, P. & Atashi, A. DNA damage from long-term occupational exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields among power plant workers. Mutat. Res. Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen . 846, 403079 (2019). Mahaki, H., Jabarivasal, N., Sardarian, K., and Zamani, A. The effects of extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields on c-Maf, STAT6, and RORα expressions in spleen and thymus of rat. Electromagnetic Biol. Med. 38 , 177–183 (2019a). Zendehdel, R., Yu, I. J., Hajipour-Verdom, B. & Panjali, Z. DNA effects of low level occupational exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (50/60 Hz). Toxicol. Ind. Health 35, 424-430 (2019). Hansson Mild, K., Lundström, R. & Wilén, J. Non-Ionizing Radiation in Swedish Health Care Exposure and Safety Aspects. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16, 1186 (2019). Tian, H. et al. System-level biological effects of extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields: an in vivo experimental review. Front. Neurosci. 17, 1247021 (2023). Alamin, H. M. S. et al. Awareness and perception of electromagnetic field exposure risk among health professional students: Insights from a public institute. Glob. J. Med. Pharm. Biomed. Update 20, 11 (2025). Tables Table 1. Data on demographic information of dentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed to non-ionizing radiation Variable Dentist and healthcare personnel (n=131) Gencer Female Oral and maxillofacial surgery Endodontics Orthodontics Pedodontics Periodontology Prosthodontics Restorative dentistry Male Oral and maxillofacial surgery Endodontics Orthodontics Pedodontics Periodontology Prosthodontics Restorative dentistry 11 12 8 14 10 14 6 18 5 10 4 5 9 5 Chronic disease Yes No 21 110 Smoking Yes No 17 114 Drinking Yes No 19 112 Total years of work Oral and maxillofacial surgery Endodontics Orthodontics Pedodontics Periodontology Prosthodontics Restorative dentistry 8.25 4 4.71 6.28 5.43 7.24 7.55 Daily working hourse 7 hours 131 Table 2. Power density value (S). Electric and magnetic field values calculated from S value in the oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontology, prosthodontics, restorative dentistry clinics and corridor. Groups Variable S (µW/m) E (µV/m) M (µA/m) Corridor 17.52 81.29 0.22 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 1181.57 667.25 1.77 Pedodontics 77.64 171.17 0.45 Endodontics 55.28 144.38 0.38 Periodontology 47.20 133.36 0.35 Prosthodontics 59.59 149.93 0.39 Restorative dentistry 57.65 147.45 0.39 Orthodontics 56.35 145.75 0.39 Table 3. Telomere length results of dentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed to non-ionizing radiation Groups Average telomere length on each chromosome end (kb) Oral and maxillofacial surgery 8.39 Pedodontics 15.39 Endodontics 27.6 Periodontology 25.9 Prosthodontics 37.81 Restorative dentistry 12.23 Orthodontics 31.57 Referance 52.26 Table 4. Telomere ∆∆Cq results of dentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed to non-ionizing radiation Variable Telomer ∆∆Cq Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Referance 1.60 0.780 61,95 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -3,86 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 3.14 0.879 Control vs restorative dentistry -2,27 0.023 Pedodontics 1.58 0.520 Endodontics 0.81 0.716 Periodontology 1.01 0.721 Prosthodontics 1.22 1.086 Restorative dentistry 2.25 0.790 Orthodontics 0.96 0.801 Table 5. Comet assay results of dentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed non- ionizing radiation and control groups Variable Head Lenght Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Control 407,00 103,58 1681,67 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -16.96 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 207,00 43,82 Control vs periodontology -15.68 0.000 Pedodontics 200,00 63,05 Control vs orthodontics -8.72 0.000 Endodontics 393,00 98,44 Periodontology 402,00 120,60 Prosthodontics 393,00 79,66 Restorative dentistry 374,00 104,13 Orthodontics 328,00 103,00 Variable Tail Lenght Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Control 58.0 51.34 732,12 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -16.89 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 214.5 67.42 Control vs pedodontics -12.60 0.000 Pedodontics 156.0 67.91 Control vs endodontics -11.44 0.000 Endodontics 168.0 66.12 Control vs periodontology -7.26 0.000 Periodontology 109.0 72.29 Control vs prosthodontics -12.46 0.000 Prosthodontics 175.0 121.08 Control vs restorative dentistry -12.24 0.000 Restorative dentistry 266.0 153.63 Control vs ortodontics -8.23 0.000 Orthodontics 123.0 92.50 Variable Comet Lenght Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Control 490.000 137.125 844,16 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -4.600 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 424.000 92.528 Control vs pedodontics -9.059 0.000 Pedodontics 363.000 107.136 Control vs endodontics -6.328 0.000 Endodontics 570.000 126.598 Control vs periodontology -3.380 0.001 Periodontology 532.500 169.112 Control vs prosthodontics -7.676 0.000 Prosthodontics 585.000 163.689 Control vs restorative dentistry -8.607 0.000 Restorative dentistry 679.000 198.303 Orthodontics 453.500 171.707 Vaiable Head DNA Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Control 97.000 1.795 1843,59 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -18.57 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 74.000 21.562 Control vs pedodontics -16.49 0.000 Pedodontics 82.000 6.336 Control vs endodontics -12.46 0.000 Endodontics 87.000 5.723 Control vs periodontology -9.35 0.000 Periodontology 93.000 3.990 Control vs prosthodontics -13.78 0.000 Prosthodontics 90.000 5.772 Control vs restorative dentistry -13.09 0.000 Restorative dentistry 79.000 10.662 Control vs orthodontics -15.05 0.000 Orthodontics 90.000 5.868 Variable Tail DNA Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Control 3,000 1,769 1865,39 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -18.61 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 27,000 7,252 Control vs pedodontics -16.49 0.000 Pedodontics 18,000 6,328 Control vs endodontics -12.48 0.000 Endodontics 13,000 5,717 Control vs periodontology -9.48 0.000 Periodontology 7,000 3,960 Control vs prosthodontics -13.78 0.000 Prosthodontics 10,000 5,708 Control vs restorative dentistry -13.09 0.000 Restorative dentistry 21,000 8,635 Control vs orthodontics -15.00 0.000 Orthodontics 10,000 3,895 Vaiable TM Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Control 2.000 3.63046 1444,36 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -18,51 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 58.000 30.588 Control vs pedodontics -15,92 0.000 Pedodontics 27.000 19.105 Control vs endodontics -12,92 0.000 Endodontics 21.000 16.482 Control vs periodontology -9,08 0.000 Periodontology 7.000 11.380 Control vs prosthodontics -13,52 0.000 Prosthodontics 18.000 28.455 Control vs restorative dentistry -13,06 0.000 Restorative dentistry 57.000 59.007 Control vs orthodontics -12,57 0.000 Orthodontics 12.000 14.930 Variable OTM Groups Median SD Kruskal–Wallis (χ² (df)) p Comparison (Mann-Whitney U) Z p Control 6.0 4.743 1206,24 0.000 Control vs oral and maxillofacial surgery -18.51 0.000 Oral and maxillofacial surgery 38.0 14.766 Control vs pedodontics -15.92 0.000 Pedodontics 22.0 11.404 Control vs endodontics -12.92 0.000 Endodontics 23.0 12.931 Control vs periodontology -9.08 0.000 Periodontology 11.0 10.583 Control vs prosthodontics -13.52 0.000 Prosthodontics 21.0 17.246 Control vs restorative dentistry -13.06 0.000 Restorative dentistry 43.5 31.310 Control vs orthodontics -12.57 0.000 Orthodontics 14.0 10.366 Graphs Graphs 1 to 10 are available in the Supplementary Files section. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files graphs.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 22 Dec, 2025 Reviews received at journal 19 Dec, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 24 Nov, 2025 Reviews received at journal 21 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 06 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 15 Sep, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 09 Sep, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 09 Sep, 2025 Editor invited by journal 20 Aug, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 20 Aug, 2025 First submitted to journal 20 Aug, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7300847","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":515447096,"identity":"f637611b-a64a-4210-a87a-ba6dfac2d48e","order_by":0,"name":"Kardelen TUR","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Erciyes University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kardelen","middleName":"","lastName":"TUR","suffix":""},{"id":515447097,"identity":"1fb7f097-fde3-40a6-b403-3c46151ff562","order_by":1,"name":"Salih VAROL","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Erciyes University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Salih","middleName":"","lastName":"VAROL","suffix":""},{"id":515447099,"identity":"a1acd896-49a6-4c91-81b7-51babdd97cef","order_by":2,"name":"Tuğçe ERBAŞ","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Erciyes University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tuğçe","middleName":"","lastName":"ERBAŞ","suffix":""},{"id":515447101,"identity":"3c2a3cd0-ebe7-448a-bc35-0f8c5a07a878","order_by":3,"name":"Dicle ASLAN","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Erciyes University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Dicle","middleName":"","lastName":"ASLAN","suffix":""},{"id":515447103,"identity":"e84ed02f-3f1c-47e3-987f-ecf532f107c1","order_by":4,"name":"Fazile CANTÜRK TAN","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Erciyes University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Fazile","middleName":"CANTÜRK","lastName":"TAN","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-05 12:53:29","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7300847/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7300847/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":91561297,"identity":"00c3b91d-86b6-470f-bb4b-875159a815f3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 18:47:29","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":77702,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDNA damage results were evaluated as a) Control group tail DNA 3.52%, b) Oral and maxillofacial surgery tail DNA 26.73%, c) Pedodontics tail DNA 17.23%, d) Endodontics tail DNA 12.66%, e) Periodontologytail DNA 7.16%, f) Prosthodonticstail DNA 10.8%, g) Restorative dentistrytail DNA 21.3%, h) Orthodontics tail DNA 9.99% (Ethidium bromide staining x200, Olympus, Japan).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7300847/v1/a8ec53e3a5837ed4d9f0359b.jpg"},{"id":91563040,"identity":"6460a49f-4a57-4089-946b-65439dbded63","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 19:03:30","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1677513,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7300847/v1/3d7e159d-7752-466b-a96e-5193b67a8ce3.pdf"},{"id":91561300,"identity":"7954fcff-ff8b-47b7-a8ab-152ad83005e0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 18:47:29","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":764588,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"graphs.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7300847/v1/b7909203a4c68da7ac646775.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Effect of occupational exposure of dentists and healthcare personnel to electromagnetic fields on telomere length and DNA damage","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAs a result of technological developments, high-tech medical instruments and devices have rapidly increased in number and variety. These tools emitting electromagnetic fields (EMFs) have become an indisputable and essential part of our daily life. For many years, groups like the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) have been organizing and conducting research on electrical appliances and electromagnetic fields. These organizations offer guidelines and suggestions about technology that have the potential to affect human life. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection have suggest EMF exposure can be detrimental and pose a risk to human health\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe increase usage of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and electromagnetic fields (EMF) emitting technologies using in the healthcare may lead to interactions between dentists and heathcare personnel that are above acceptable bounds\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Many electrically powered gadgets are utilized on a daily basis in dentistry clinical practice. Aerators, micromotors, laboratory-type micromotors, contra-angle, straight, and cavitrons, as well as light polymerization devices, reflectors, and ultrasonic cleaners are the most often utilized devices. Compared to many other medical specialties, the effects of EMFs on human health are believed to be more severe in the dental field since the EMF-generating devices are utilized close to the the craniocervical region. Exposure to EMFs from devices used in dental clinics may be considered to have little effect on patients due to the limited time and number of clinic visits for each patient. However, considering the application times, the effects on dentists and healthcare personnel is significant\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMedical sources of EMF created into two categories: sources of low-frequency, static fields (0 Hz\u0026ndash;100 kHz) and sources of high-frequency fields (100 kHz\u0026ndash;300 GHz). By magnetically inducing internal electric fields, a powerful enough low frequency EMF can stimulate sensory organs as well as nerve or muscle tissue. If the high-frequency EMF is strong enough, it can potentially result in tissue damage and overheating\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Dental tools are electrically network-connected devices that produce ELFs with power frequencies between 50 and 60 Hz\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. More than three times the EMF of 1\u0026micro;T (microtesla), the IEEE-recommended EMF for use, can be produced by these electrical dental devices, according to recent observations\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExperimental studies have occasionally reported EMF hazards, such as inducing DNA damage\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and apoptosis\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Epidemiological studies have also revealed a potential link between EMF exposure and an increased risk of diseases, including cancer\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, neurodegenerative disease\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, cardiovascular disease\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e or longevity and cellular senescence\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Descriptive rules and research on the potential adverse effects of these devices in routine clinical practice are lacking, nevertheless\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It is common to overlook the effects of EMFs caused by electrical devices utilized in clinical settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe aim of the study was investigate the effects of occupational exposure of dentists and healthcare personnel to electromagnetic fields on telomere length and DNA damage. In addition, electric and magnetic fields were calculated by measuring power densities in dental clinics.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eSelection of subjects\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eEthical approval for this study was conducted with the decision of Erciyes University, Faculty of Medicine, Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Decision no: 2024/144 and date 28.02.2024). All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations by including a statement. The study was conducted in two groups: control and exposure groups. The control group consisted of healthy volunteers (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7) was selected from people aged 20\u0026ndash;28 who were not working at the faculty of dentistry. The exposure groups consisted of 131 dentists and healthcare personnel working in the departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;29), endodontics (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;17), orthodontics (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18), pedodontics (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18), periodontology (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15), prosthodontics (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23), restorative dentistry (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11) aged between 20\u0026ndash;28 in the Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eA questionnaire of demographic information\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA questionnaire was created to gather data on demographic factors like age, gender, chronic disease, family history of cancer, and lifestyle factors like smoking, and drinking.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePower density value measure and\u003c/b\u003e \u003cem\u003ee\u003c/em\u003e\u003cb\u003electric and magnetic field calculation\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePower density value (S) was measured using the HF broadband meter-HF59B (Langenzenn, Germany) device from the corridor (control group) and the oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontology, prosthodontics, and restorative dentistry clinics (exposure group) for 6 minutes with two repetitions in 7 different areas in the Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry. After measuring with the antenna from different heights and distances, the optimum distance and height were selected. In all areas where the measurements were made, the antenna was placed at a height of 92 cm from the ground and 70 cm from the devices. Electric and magnetic field values were calculated from the S value using the following formulas:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eElectric field (E) calculation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eE: \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\sqrt{S\\cdot\\:n}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eE: Electric field intensity (V/m)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eS: Power density (W/m\u0026sup2;)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003en: Free space impedance (377 Ω)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Heading\"\u003eE: \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\sqrt{S\\cdot\\:377}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMagnetic field (M) calculation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eM: \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\sqrt{\\frac{S}{n}}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eM: Magnetic field intensity (A/m)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Heading\"\u003eM: \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\sqrt{\\frac{S}{377}}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eEvaluation of telomere length\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAfter obtaining consent from all groups, 2 ml of whole blood was collected containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as the anticoagulant. Telomere length from serum samples was evaluated using the Absolute Human Telomere Length Quantification qPCR Assay Kit (Science Cell, Carlsbad, USA). Telomere length was calculated using Cq values obtained from qPCR data. The ΔCq (TEL) value obtained with the telomere primer was calculated by subtracting the Cq value of the reference DNA from the Cq value of the test DNA.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eΔCq(TEL)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Cq(TEL, isolated DNA sample) - Cq(TEL, reference DNA sample)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe ΔCq (SCR) value obtained with the SCR primer was calculated similarly.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eΔCq(SCR)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Cq(SCR, isolated DNA sample) - Cq(SCR, reference DNA sample)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThen, the ΔΔCq value was obtained by taking the difference between these two values and telomere length was calculated.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt was expressed as fold change with the formula 2\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;ΔΔCq\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRelative telomere length of isolated DNA samples compared to the reference DNA sample (Fold)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;ΔΔCq\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal telomere length of DNA sample isolated per diploid cell\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Telomere length of reference DNA sample \u0026times; 2\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;ΔΔCq\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eSingle cell gel electrophoresis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSingle cell gel electrophoresis (comet assay) was performed under alkaline conditions to detect single and double DNA strand breaks. The isolation of human lymphocytes was using Histopaque-1077 (10771, Sigma-Aldrich) from 3 ml of whole blood containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as the anticoagulant. Isolation was performed according to the manufacturer's product information sheet. The lymphocytes were used as a single cell suspension for the comet assay. The comet assay includes cell isolation, slide preparation, lysis, DNA resolution, electrophoresis, neutralization, staining, and evaluation\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Alkaline comet assay for blood was performed by modifying Bankoglu\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Slides were pre-coated with 0.5% normal melting agarose before one day. 100 \u0026micro;L of cell suspension was mixed with 500 \u0026micro;L of 0.8% lower melting point agarose and then quickly spread onto a glass microscope and slides covered coverslip. The slides were kept for about 10 min. solidify of agarose on the icebox. Then coverslips were gently removed, and the slides were placed into lysing solution (2.5 M NaCl, 100 mM EDTA, 10 mM Tris pH\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10, containing 10% DMSO and 1% Triton X-100) at least for 30 min at 4\u0026deg;C. The slides placed in the horizontal gel electrophoresis tank were held in an ice-cold electrophoresis solution (0.3 M NaOH, 1 mM EDTA, pH\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;13) for 20 min, which allowed unwinding of DNA. Following electrophoresis, carried out at 25 V, 300 mA for 20 min, the slides were washed with neutralization buffer\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Finally, the slides were stained with 20 \u0026micro;g/ml of ethidium bromide for about 5 min and examined using the fluorescent microscope (Olympus BX51). The DNA tail that migrated from the cell head and caused the comet was a piece of DNA in lymphocyte nuclei. DNA stained with ethidium bromide was examined using a fluorescence microscope at a 200x magnification. With the aid of comet assay software (CASP, publiclly accessible, \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://www.casp.of.pl\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.casp.of.pl\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, Wroclaw, Poland), 50 randomly chosen lymphocyte cell nuclei were examined. Damaged cells were classified as having tails. The length head (\u0026micro;m), length tail (\u0026micro;m), length comet (\u0026micro;m), head DNA (%), tail DNA (%), tail moment, and olive tail moment are the seven comet parameters used to describe DNA damage\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eStatistical Assessment\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). The normality of the data was assessed separately using both the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. Since none of the variables exhibited a normal distribution, non-parametric methods were used throughout the analysis. Differences between groups were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis H test. When a statistically significant difference was detected, pairwise comparisons were carried out using the Mann-Whitney U test. Data were presented as median values due to the non-normal distribution of variables. To reduce the risk of type I error arising from multiple comparisons, Bonferroni correction was applied where necessary. A p-value of \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 was considered statistically significant.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted on dentist and healthcare workers who were occupationally exposed to electromagnetic field (oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontology, prosthodontics, restorative dentistry) in the Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry and healthy volunteers who were not occupationally exposed to radiation. We were evaluated DNA damage and telomere length. Power density value (S) was measured and electric and magnetic field values ​​were calculated from S value in the dentistry clinics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eA questionnaire of demographic information\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire questions including demographic information of dentists and healthcare personnel workers and the number of respondents are given in Table\u0026nbsp;1.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eElectric and magnetic field\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe power density value (S) to be used in electric and magnetic field measurements was measured for 6 minutes with two repetitions from the corridor and from the oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontics, prosthodontics and restorative dentistry clinics. The antenna was placed at a height of 92 cm from the ground and 70 cm from the devices (Table\u0026nbsp;2). Power density values ​​varied significantly among clinics. The highest power density was measured as 1181.57 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2; in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. Pedodontics was 77.64 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, endodontics was 55 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, periodontics was 47.20 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, prosthodontics was 59.59 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, restorative dentistry was 57.65 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, and orthodontics was 56.35 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;. The lowest power density was measured as 17.52 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2; in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment). The highest electric field values ​​were calculated as 667.25 \u0026micro;V/m in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. The values ​​were calculated as 171.17 \u0026micro;V/m in pedodontics, 144.38 \u0026micro;V/m in endodontics, 133.36 \u0026micro;V/m in periodontics, 149.93 \u0026micro;V/m in prosthodontics, 147.45 \u0026micro;V/m in restorative dental treatment, and 145.75 \u0026micro;V/m in orthodontics. The lowest electric field was calculated as 81.29 \u0026micro;V/m in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment). The highest magnetic field values ​​were calculated as 1.77 \u0026micro;A/m in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. Pedodontics were 0.45 \u0026micro;A/m, endodontics were 0.38 \u0026micro;A/m, periodontology were 0.35 \u0026micro;A/m, prosthodontics were 0.39 \u0026micro;A/m, restorative dental treatment were 0.39 \u0026micro;A/m, and orthodontics were 0.39 \u0026micro;A/m. The lowest magnetic field was calculated as 0.22 \u0026micro;A/m in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eTelomer results\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTelomere length was assessed in dentists and healthcare personnel workers using the Absolute Human Telomere Length Quantification qPCR Assay Kit (ScienceCell, Carlsbad, USA). The average telomere length corresponding to each chromosome end was determined in kilobases (kb). Groups were compared according to the kit's reference value (Table\u0026nbsp;3). When evaluated according to the reference value of the kit used (52.26 kb), the average telomere length was evaluated as the lowest, 8.39 kb in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The average telomere length of endodontics 27.60 kb, periodontology 25.90 kb, pedodontics 15.39 kb, restorative dental treatment clinic 12.23 kb, prosthodontics 37.82 kb, and orthodontics 31.57 kb were evaluated. The lowest value was for restorative dental treatment clinic.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e∆∆Cq values, thought to reflect telomere length, were compared among seven different dental clinics (Table\u0026nbsp;4, Garph 1). The Kruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis test revealed a statistically significant difference between the groups (χ\u0026sup2; = 61.95; p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The Mann\u0026ndash;Whitney U test was used for significant comparisons. The median ∆∆Cq value was highest in the oral and maxillofacial surgery group at 3.14. This group had a significantly higher ∆∆Cq value compared to the kit's reference value (Z = -3.86; p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). This finding suggests that surgical procedures may have negative effects on telomere integrity, possibly causing telomere shortening or stress. The median ∆∆Cq value in the restorative dentistry group was 2.25, which was statistically significantly higher than the kit's reference value (Z = -2.27; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.023). This suggests that restorative procedures may also have an impact on telomere levels. In contrast, ∆∆Cq values in the pedodontics (1.58), endodontics (0.81), periodontology (1.01), prosthodontics (1.22), and orthodontics (0.96) groups were closer to the kit's reference value, and no significant difference was observed in these groups. These findings suggest that surgical and restorative procedures, in particular, can create significant biological stress on telomere structure and that this stress can be associated with an increase in telomere ∆∆Cq. This result supports the DNA damage findings obtained with the comet assay.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eReal-Time PCR with Telomere Primers (Amplification Curve and Melt Curve)\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe amplification curve showed that reactions using TEL primers transitioned to the logarithmic phase after the 20th cycle, demonstrating significant amplification. The amplification signal was strong and reproducible; the overlapping and parallel progression of the curves supported the technical accuracy and primer-specific efficiency of the experiment. The ΔRn (fluorescent signal) maximum was around ~\u0026thinsp;5.5\u0026nbsp;million, indicating a high DNA amount and robust amplification. Early Cq values suggested that the telomere region has a high copy number due to the numerous repeats it contains and was therefore detectable in the early cycles. A single, intense peak was observed in the melt curve obtained with the telomere primers between 80\u0026ndash;82\u0026deg;C. This indicated that the amplified product was specific and that no non-specific product or dimer formation was observed. The smooth and reproducible curves supported that the PCR conditions were optimized (Graph 2).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eReal-Time PCR Performed with SCR Primers (Amplification Curve and Melt Curve)\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the amplification reaction with SCR primers, the curves began to rise at later cycles (approximately cycles 28\u0026ndash;35). This indicated that the SCR target region was present in fewer copies in the genome and represented by a lower starting DNA amount compared to telomeres. The fluorescence intensity was lower than that of TEL (up to ~\u0026thinsp;4\u0026nbsp;million), which may be due to the lower copy count of traditional reference genes. Because the amplification curves were smooth and sequential, the experiment's reliability was considered high. The melt curve obtained with the SCR primers contained an intense peak around 80\u0026ndash;82\u0026deg;C. The similar melting temperature of the telomere primers indicated that both reactions were run under similar PCR conditions and that no specificity issues were encountered. The presence of a single major peak indicated that specific amplification was successful and no non-specific product was formed (Graph 3).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eDNA damage results\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead length, tail length, comet length, head DNA, tail DNA, TM, and OTM values measured with the comet assay were compared among eight different groups. According to the Kruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis test, statistically significant differences were found between the groups for all parameters (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Pairwise comparisons for significant variables were made using the Mann\u0026ndash;Whitney U test (Table\u0026nbsp;5).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead length values were highest in the control group (407.00), while significant decreases were found in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (207.00), pedodontics (200.00), and orthodontics (328.00) groups (Graph 4). Regarding tail length (Graph 5), values increased in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (214.5), restorative (266.0), and prosthodontics (175.00) groups, while this value remained significantly lower in the control group (58.00). The comet length parameter was found to be highest in the restorative dentistry group (679.0), but the most striking differences were seen in variables such as OTM and tail DNA, which more accurately reflect overall DNA damage, in the oral and maxillofacial surgery group (Graph 6). While the head DNA ratio was 97.0 in the control group, significant decreases were noted in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (74.0), pedodontics (82.0), and endodontics (87.0) groups (Graph 7). This can indicate a decrease in the proportion of intact DNA. Tail DNA was found to be high in the oral and maxillofacial surgery (27.0), pedodontics (18.0), and restorative dentistry (21.0) groups, but was measured at only 3.0 in the control group (Graph 8). TM (Graph 9) and OTM (Graph 10) values, which reflect the extent and intensity of DNA damage, were highest in the oral and maxillofacial surgery group (58.0 and 38.0, respectively). These results indicate that the oral and maxillofacial surgery group had the highest DNA damage across all parameters. Conversely, the periodontology group had the least DNA damage after the control group. In this group, tail DNA (7.0), OTM (11.0), and TM (7.0) values were lower than in the other intervention groups. Head DNA values were also found to be high (93.0). These results suggest that the periodontology group could relatively more protected in terms of DNA integrity (Table\u0026nbsp;5).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eMany researchers have hypothesized that exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) may be linked to long-term health issues. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) categorized both RF and ELF (magnetic fields) as category 2B, potentially harmful to humans, based on the available scientific data\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Additionally, the IARC advisory council debated reclassifying RFR as a Group 1 carcinogen in April 2019\u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e. Human EMF effects are mostly brought on by extended exposure. However, each person's exposure time is different, and not all illnesses are brought on by the same exposure\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Guidelines for the general public prepared by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection limit EMF exposure to 200 micro-Teslas (\u0026micro;T) at 60 Hz for any given period of time to prevent effects on nervous system function\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen a low frequency electromagnetic field is powerful enough, it can magnetically induce internal electric fields that stimulate nerve or muscle tissue as well as sensory organs. Additionally, it might result in tissue damage and overheating when the high-frequency EMF is strong enough\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Aldad et al. demonstrated that exposure to radiofrequency radiation at frequencies between 800 and 1900 MHz results in behavioral and neurophysiological changes that persist into adulthood. Mice exposed to radiofrequency radiation during pregnancy exhibited memory impairment, hyperactivity, and anxiety, suggesting that in utero radiofrequency exposure is a potential cause of neurological disorders\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Pregnancy is specifically deemed to be at higher risk under the European Directive\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Hosseinabadi et al. investigated that how power plant workers' stress, anxiety, depression, and sleep quality were affected by long-term exposure to ELF-EMF. Compared to the unexposed group, the exposed workers' sleep quality was noticeably worse. Additionally, the exposed group experienced more severe depression than the unexposed group. Stress, depression, and anxiety were directly and significantly correlated with higher ELF-EMF exposure. Compared to the other groups, the technicians who had the most exposure had much worse sleep quality. According to this study, prolonged exposure to ELF-EMF at work may cause worry, stress, sadness, and poor sleep\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Epidemiologic research suggests that exposure to ELF-EMF is associated with an increased risk of miscarriage, Alzheimer's disease (AD), and pediatric cancer. However, the ELF-EMF does not appear to increase the risk of adult cancer. Furthermore, there is no solid proof that exposure to ELF-EMF causes cardiovascular disease mortality\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. According to Shapira et al., young military personnel who were exposed to non-ionizing radiation did not have a higher short-term risk of developing cancer than young adults who were not exposed\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn routine dentistry clinical, aerators, micromotors, laboratory-type micromotors, contra-angle, straight, and cavitrons, as well as light polymerization devices, reflectors, and ultrasonic cleaners, are the most often utilized devices. In dentistry clinical, these tools are utilized in tandem on a daily basis. As a result, the EMF emitted by each device combines and a more intense electromagnetic environment is formed in total. Even if the patient's stay at the dental unit is only a few minutes, on an average workday, the dentist and other dental staff who share the same workspace may be exposed to this electromagnetic field for hours. Also, dental students are exposure to ELF-MF during dentistry training\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Dental students undergo a learning process that is closely intertwined with the use of devices emitting electromagnetic fields (EMFs) during both preclinical and clinical training. Exposure to EMFs in preclinical laboratories as well as during clinical internships constitutes a significant public health concern that is often overlooked within academic settings. Compared to other medical disciplines, dental practice may carry a higher risk due to the prolonged duration and localized intensity of EMF exposure.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Direct application of electromagnetic fields to the craniocervical region may lead to more pronounced potential effects on the central nervous system and surrounding structures. Although patients are assumed to be less exposed due to their short clinical time, the effects of exposure on dentists and allied health personnel who work with these devices for extended periods require further investigation. Even though the EMF's impacts aren't typically thought of as acute, they are known to build up over time and show up.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe measured power density value (S) in dental clinics. Electric and magnetic field values ​​were calculated from S value. The S value was 17.52 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2; of control (coridor). The oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic were highest measured as 1181.57 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2; in pedodontics was 77.64 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, endodontics was 55 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, periodontology was 47.20 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, prosthodontics was 59.59 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, restorative dentistry was 57.65 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2;, and orthodontics was 56.35 \u0026micro;w/m\u0026sup2; measured. The highest electric field values ​​were calculated as 667.25 \u0026micro;V/m in the oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. The values ​​were calculated as 171.17 \u0026micro;V/m in pedodontics, 144.38 \u0026micro;V/m in endodontics, 133.36 \u0026micro;V/m in periodontology, 149.93 \u0026micro;V/m in prosthodontics, 147.45 \u0026micro;V/m in restorative dentistry, and 145.75 \u0026micro;V/m in orthodontics. The lowest electric field was calculated as 81.29 \u0026micro;V/m in the control group (corridor: non-clinical environment). The highest magnetic field values ​​were calculated as 1.77 \u0026micro;A/m in the oral, dental, and maxillofacial surgery clinic. Pedodontics was calculated as 0.45 \u0026micro;A/m, endodontics as 0.38 \u0026micro;A/m, periodontics as 0.35 \u0026micro;A/m, prosthodontics as 0.39 \u0026micro;A/m, restorative dental treatment as 0.39 \u0026micro;A/m, and orthodontics as 0.39 \u0026micro;A/m. The lowest magnetic field was calculated as 0.22 \u0026micro;A/m in the corridor (outside the clinic). Our findings are similar to those in the studies by Huang and Kim\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBulut et al. showed that all dental devices' ELF-MF readings above the 2 mG (0.2 \u0026micro;T, 50 Hz) danger limit for prolonged exposure\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Huang et al. suggested that dentists may be over exposed to power frequency ELF-MF. Furthermore, in locations where dentists typically treat patients, some dental equipment may generate ELF-MF levels higher than 0.4 \u0026micro;T\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Kim et al. showed that the average MF exposure level of 10 endodontic dentists was 0.03 \u0026micro;T. According to the research, endodontic dentists had a lower average EMF exposure than other hospital staff. The International Committee on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection's suggested maximum acute exposure limit of 200 \u0026micro;T for worker protection against ELF-EMFs was significantly higher than any of the observed exposure levels. Although high levels of exposure occurred in the operating room and x-ray room, the MF exposure level for endodontic dentist during routine endodontic work was minimal. However, comparatively significant exposure levels were found in an operating room and x-ray room, most likely due to the usage of surgical instruments like monitors and microscopes, as well as different motors and power cables of x-ray machines with high current flows\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere are limited publications and studies on dentists' exposure to electromagnetic fields, indicating that the effects of EMFs caused by electrical devices used in dental clinical environments are underestimated. Mortazavi et al., showed that dentists' serum cortisol levels can be lowered by the electromagnetic fields generated by magnetostrictive cavitrons\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Ouyang et al., exposure to non-ionizing radiation emitted by blue light and UV light (ultraviolet) used in dentistry can damage various structures of the eye, including the retina and cornea\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe evaluated the telomere length of dentists and healthcare personnel occupationally exposed to electromagnetic fields. Based on the kit's reference value (52.26 kb), the mean telomere length was lowest in oral and maxillofacial surgery, at 8.39 kb. Oral and maxillofacial surgery, the clinic with the highest EMF exposure, is an environment where high-frequency micromotors, electrocautery devices, and lighting systems are frequently used. Endodontics (27.60 kb), periodontics (25.90 kb), and pedodontics (15.39 kb). Although EMF sources are concentrated in these clinics, the exposure level was assessed as lower due to factors such as frequency of use, distance from the device to the operator, and duration of use. In endodontics, in particular, devices used are often operated for short periods. Telomere length was lowest in restorative dentistry clinics, at 12.23 kb. The prosthodontics was 37.81 kb and the orthodontic size was 31.57 kb. The higher values ​​may have been due to factors such as the desk-type devices and the greater distance between the personnel and the device. These results are also supported by studies by Fan et al. and Li et al. Fan et al. showed in their study on mouse breast cancer cell line that static magnetic field treatment shortens telomere length, reduces telomerase activity and inhibits the expression of telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT). Li et al. show that telomerase expression can be increased after 138 days of exposure to 1800 MHz electromagnetic radiation (EMR) in NIH/3T3 cells\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComet results showed that EMFs caused more DNA damage in the oral and maxillofacial surgery. These findings suggest that EMF exposure disrupts DNA integrity, producing double- and single-strand breaks. Oral and maxillofacial surgery personnel were found to have higher DNA damage compared to other clinics. The electric and magnetic field values ​​of the devices used in oral and maxillofacial surgery (high-speed surgical micromotors, electrocautery, reflector systems, and light sources) were measured at higher values ​​than in other clinics. It can be suggested that higher EMF values ​​cause DNA strand breaks. Hosseinabadi et al. showed that long-term occupational exposure to ELF-EMF among power plant workers were significantly higher in the exposed group compared to the unexposed group comet parameter. Long-term exposure to ELF-EMFs at work may be likely to have genotoxic effects\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Certain genes may be impacted by ELF-EMFs, whereas others may not be significantly impacted. Mahaki et al. (2019a) demonstrated that after two months of exposure to ELF-EMFs, the expression levels of retinoid-related orphan receptor alpha (RORα), signal transducer and activator of transcription 6 (STAT6), and transcription factor Maf (c-Maf) in the rat spleen were significantly decreased\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe utility workers' occupational exposure levels to ELF-MF were below the threshold limit values (TLV) that the American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) recommends. DNA strand breaks may result from exposure to ELF-MF at concentrations below the ACGIH exposure limit\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Based on the literature and after consulting staff, healthcare professionals' knowledge of risks and safety precautions needed to be improved and that clear, evidence-based information from reliable sources was needed and that it should be clear to the user which source to refer to\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. There are data suggesting that EMF can alter gene expression at the epigenetic level and increase the risk of certain chronic diseases, including cancer. Therefore, the biological effects of non-ionizing radiation should be evaluated not only through short-term physical complaints but also through long-term systemic effects\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Dentists and healthcare professionals working in clinics with high power density, electric and magnetic fields were evaluated to have shorter telomeres and higher DNA damage.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnderstanding the biological effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) is essential not only for the safe use of existing devices but also for the safer design of emerging technologies. Incorporating risk\u0026ndash;benefit analyses of EMF exposure and mitigating the potential harms of non-ionizing radiation should be regarded as integral components of health policies and occupational safety regulations. In the integration of new technologies, risk assessments should extend beyond considerations of mechanical efficiency and economic cost to include long-term biological effects as well as implications for occupational health and safety. Moreover, the risk is not confined to the device itself; environmental factors\u0026mdash;such as the number of devices, duration of operation, room size, ventilation systems, and reflective surfaces\u0026mdash;also play a critical role in determining exposure levels.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTherefore, managing electromagnetic field exposure should require a multidisciplinary approach that incorporates the combined contributions of engineering, occupational health and safety, and clinical sciences. On the other hand, healthcare workers' knowledge levels and protective behaviors regarding EMF exposure are also a significant topic of discussion. A study by Mild et al. (2019) reported that healthcare workers' knowledge of the biological effects of EMFs and safety measures is low and that their awareness needs to be increased\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The study emphasized that users lack access to reliable sources and that the available information is often technical, fragmented, and lacks practical application. This can lead to workers being unprotected and underestimating occupational risks. Furthermore, definitive guidelines and research on the potential adverse effects of these devices in routine clinical practice are lacking\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It is common to overlook the effects of EMFs caused by electrical devices used in clinical settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study has certain limitations that should be considered. The respondents belong only to the Erciyes University, Faculty of Dentistry population. The cross-sectional design provides valuable associations but does not allow firm conclusions regarding causality. In addition, the control group size was relatively small compared to the exposed groups, which may affect generalizability. Environmental factors such as room size, ventilation, and duration of exposure could not be fully standardized, and individual lifestyle differences may also have influenced the results. Despite these limitations, the findings highlight important associations that warrant confirmation in larger, multicenter, and longitudinal studies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe rapid proliferation of new diagnostic and therapeutic technologies offers significant benefits but may also carry potential health risks if appropriate precautions are not observed. Electromagnetic fields represent one such factor that warrants attention, as they may contribute to occupational exposure among healthcare professionals. Adhering to recommended exposure limits for non-ionizing radiation is therefore essential. At the same time, further research is needed to clarify the long-term health effects of electromagnetic fields and to better evaluate their potential risks and benefits. Within this context, the integration of such technologies into routine dental practice should be accompanied by heightened awareness and preventive measures, ensuring that both dentists and allied healthcare personnel are adequately informed about possible occupational risks. This study is of clinical importance for dentists, healthcare personnel, and dental students to gain knowledge about radiation protection measures to overcome the harmful effects of radiation during their clinical practice.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eFunding:\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo funding\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eF.C.T. was responsible for the study design and writing of the article. K.T. and S.V. performed analyses of DNA damage and telomere length. K.T. and T.E. were measuring electric and magnetic fields. D.A. was responsible for the statistical analysis of the data.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe financial support from Erciyes University\u0026mdash;The Scientific Research Projects of Turkey (ERUBAP); Project number: TYL-2024-13785\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable\u0026nbsp;request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eInternational Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Principles for non-ionizing radiation protection. \u003cem\u003eHealth Phys.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e118\u003c/strong\u003e, 477-482 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuven, M., Eroglu, E. \u0026amp; Comlekci, S. Electromagnetic Fields in Dental Clinics. \u003cem\u003eAm. J. Biomed. Sci. \u0026amp; Res.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 502-503 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStam, R. \u0026amp;\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eYamaguchi-Sekino, S. Occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields from medical sources. \u003cem\u003eInd. Health\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e56,\u003c/strong\u003e 96-105 (2018).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim, D. W., Choi, J. L., Kwon, M. K., Nam, T. J. \u0026amp; Lee, S. J. Assessment of daily exposure of endodontic personnel to extremely low frequency magnetic fields. \u003cem\u003eInt. Endod. J.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e45\u003c/strong\u003e, 744-748 (2012).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEroglu, E., Erken, M., Gecin, M., Demirekin, Z. \u0026amp; Comlekci, S. Kamu Ağız Diş Sağlığı Kliniklerinde Elektromanyetik Alanlar; Isparta, T\u0026uuml;rkiye. \u003cem\u003eS\u0026uuml;leyman Demirel \u0026Uuml;niversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi \u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e10, \u003c/strong\u003e129-136 (2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLai, H. Genetic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. \u003cem\u003eElectromagn. Biol. Med\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e40,\u003c/strong\u003e 264-273 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSun, C.\u003cem\u003e et al. \u003c/em\u003eInhibition of mitochondrial calcium uptake by Ru360 enhances the effect of 1800 MHz radio-frequency electromagnetic fields on DNA damage. \u003cem\u003eEcotoxicol. Environ. Saf.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e264\u003c/strong\u003e, (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRain, B. D., Plourde-Kelly, A. D., Lafrenie, R. M. \u0026amp; Dotta, B. T. Induction of Apoptosis in B16-BL6 Melanoma Cells Following Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields Modelled after Intercellular Calcium Waves. \u003cem\u003eFEBS Open Bio.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e14,\u003c/strong\u003e 515-524 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, Y. \u003cem\u003eet al. \u003c/em\u003eMobile phone use and risks of overall and 25 site-specific cancers: a prospective study from the UK biobank study. \u003cem\u003eCancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e33\u003c/strong\u003e, 88-95 (2024).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSorahan, T. \u0026amp; Nichols, L. Motor neuron disease risk and magnetic field exposures. \u003cem\u003eOccup. Med.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e72\u003c/strong\u003e, 184-190 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChai, Z., Wang, Y., Li, Y. M., Zhao, Z. G. \u0026amp; Chen, M. Correlations between geomagnetic field and global occurrence of cardiovascular diseases: evidence from 204 territories in different latitude. \u003cem\u003eBMC Public Health\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e23\u003c/strong\u003e, 1771 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eParizek, D. \u003cem\u003eet al. \u003c/em\u003eElectromagnetic fields-do they pose a cardiovascular risk? \u003cem\u003ePhysiol. Res. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e72\u003c/strong\u003e, 199-208 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWei, X., Huang, Y. \u0026amp; Sun, C. A review of effects of electromagnetic fields on ageing and ageing dependent bioeffects of electromagnetic fields. \u003cem\u003eSci. Total Environ. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e963, \u003c/strong\u003e(2025).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKameda, T. \u0026amp; Ohkuma, K. Electromagnetic fields from dental devices and their effects on human health. \u003cem\u003eJ. Electr. Electron. Syst.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3\u003c/strong\u003e, 118 (2014).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaran, M. \u003cem\u003eet al. \u003c/em\u003eHepatotoxicity and renal toxicity induced by radiation and the protective effect of quercetin in male albino rats. \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Radiat. Biol.\u003c/em\u003e 98, 1473-1483 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBankoglu, E. E., Schuele, C. \u0026amp; Stopper, H. Cell survival after DNA damage in the comet assay. \u003cem\u003eArch. Toxicol.\u003c/em\u003e 95, 3803-3813 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIARC. Non-ionizing radiation, Part 1: Static and extremely low-frequency (ELF) electric and magnetic fields. \u003cem\u003eIARC Monogr. Eval. Carcinog. Risks Hum.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e80, \u003c/strong\u003e1-395 (2002).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIARC. Non-ionizing radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. \u003cem\u003eIARC Monogr. Eval. Carcinog. Risks\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eHum\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e102,\u003c/strong\u003e 1-460 (2013).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIARC. Animal Studies Prompt Calls To Upgrade Classification to \u0026ldquo;Probably Carcinogenic\u0026rdquo; or Higher. https://microwavenews.com/short-takes-archive/iarc-urged-reassess-rf (2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBelyaev, I. \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e Europaem Emf Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Reviews on Environmental Health \u003cstrong\u003e31,\u003c/strong\u003e 363-397 (2016).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIlhan, M., Erkan, V. \u0026amp; Col, M. Electromagnetic field mapping and health status of workers exposed to electromagnetic fields in a university hospital. \u003cem\u003eReview of health and social policy\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e 1\u003c/strong\u003e, 51-58 (2017).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAldad, T.S., Gan, G., Gao, X.B., Hugh S. Taylor, H.S. Fetal radiofrequency radiation exposure from 800-1900 Mhz-rated cellular telephones affects neurodevelopment and behavior in mice. \u003cem\u003eScıentıfıc Reports\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e: 312 (2012). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003eEuropean Commission. \u003cem\u003eNon-binding guide to good practice for implementing Directive 2013/35/EU. Electromagnetic Fields\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003eVolume 1,\u003c/b\u003e Practical Guide (2014).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBagheri-Hosseinabadi, M., Khanjani, N., Ebrahimi, M. H., Haji, B. \u0026amp; Abdolahfard, M. The effect of chronic exposure to extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields on sleep quality, stress, depression and anxiety\u003cem\u003e. Electromagn. Biol. Med\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e38,\u003c/strong\u003e 96-101 (2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKarimi, A., Ghadiri-Moghaddam, F. \u0026amp; Valipour, M. Insights in the biology of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields exposure on human health. Mol. Biol. Rep. 47, 5621-5633 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShapira, S. et al. Occupational Exposure to Nonionizing Radiation and Risk for Malignancy in Young Adults. \u003cem\u003eMil. Med.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e188,\u003c/strong\u003e e2424-e2430 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHuang, S. M. \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e Occupational Exposure of Dentists to Extremely-low-frequencyMagnetic Field\u003cem\u003e. J. Occup. Health\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e53,\u003c/strong\u003e 130-136 (2011).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBulut, A., Fırlarer, A. \u0026amp; Karamuftuoglu, N. Occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields from dental devices: A descriptive study. \u003cem\u003eTurk. J. Public Health\u003c/em\u003e 21, 403-411 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMortazavi, S. M., Vazife-Doost, S., Yaghooti, M., Mehdizadeh, S. \u0026amp; Rajaie-Far, A. Occupational exposure of dentists to electromagnetic fields produced by magnetostrictive cavitrons alters the serum cortisol level. \u003cem\u003eJ. Nat. Sci. Biol. Med.\u003c/em\u003e 3, 60-64 (2012).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOuyang, X. \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e Mechanisms of blue light-induced eye hazard and protective measures: a review. \u003cem\u003eBiomed. Pharmacother. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e130, \u003c/strong\u003e110577 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFan, Z., Hu, P., Xiang, L., Liu, Y., He, R., Tao Lu, T. A static magnetic field ınhibits the migration and telomerase function of mouse breast cancer cells. Biomed Res Int. \u003cstrong\u003e11,\u003c/strong\u003e 7472618 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, B.Y., M.-L. Wang, M.L., Liu, Q.L., Q.-X. Hou, Q.X., Liu, H. The effect of 1800 MHz electromagnetic radiation on telomerase expression in NIH/3T3 cells. Medicine Sciences and Bioengineering Book Chapter, 1st Edition, pages 4 (2015) \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBagheri-Hosseinabadi, M., Khanjani, N., Mirzaii, M., Norouzi, P. \u0026amp; Atashi, A. DNA damage from long-term occupational exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields among power plant workers. \u003cem\u003eMutat. Res. Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e846,\u003c/strong\u003e 403079 (2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMahaki, H., Jabarivasal, N., Sardarian, K., and Zamani, A. The effects of extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields on c-Maf, STAT6, and ROR\u0026alpha; expressions in spleen and thymus of rat. Electromagnetic Biol. Med. \u003cstrong\u003e38\u003c/strong\u003e, 177\u0026ndash;183 (2019a).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZendehdel, R., Yu, I. J., Hajipour-Verdom, B. \u0026amp; Panjali, Z. DNA effects of low level occupational exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (50/60 Hz). \u003cem\u003eToxicol. Ind. Health \u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e35, \u003c/strong\u003e424-430 (2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHansson Mild, K., Lundstr\u0026ouml;m, R. \u0026amp; Wil\u0026eacute;n, J. Non-Ionizing Radiation in Swedish Health Care Exposure and Safety Aspects. \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Environ. Res. Public Health\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e16,\u003c/strong\u003e 1186 (2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTian, H. \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e System-level biological effects of extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields: an in vivo experimental review. \u003cem\u003eFront. Neurosci. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e17,\u003c/strong\u003e 1247021 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlamin, H. M. S.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Awareness and perception of electromagnetic field exposure risk among health professional students: Insights from a public institute. \u003cem\u003eGlob. J. Med. Pharm. Biomed. Update \u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e20, \u003c/strong\u003e11 (2025).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eData on demographic information of dentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed to non-ionizing radiation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"654\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 302px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 352px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDentist and\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ehealthcare\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epersonnel\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e(n=131)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 654px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGencer\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 218px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFemale\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMale\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 436px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 654px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eChronic disease\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 218px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 436px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e110\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 654px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSmoking\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 218px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 436px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e114\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 654px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDrinking\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 218px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 436px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e112\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 654px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal years of work\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 218px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 436px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 654px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDaily working hourse\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 218px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 hours\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 436px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e131\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ePower density value (S). Electric and magnetic field values calculated from S value in the oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontology, prosthodontics, restorative dentistry clinics and corridor.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 350px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e(\u0026micro;W/m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eE\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e(\u0026micro;V/m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eM\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e(\u0026micro;A/m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorridor\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e81.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1181.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e667.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e77.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e171.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e55.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e144.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e133.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e59.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e149.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e147.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 217px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e145.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eTelomere length results of dentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed to non-ionizing radiation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"576\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAverage telomere length\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;on each chromosome end\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;(kb)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 283px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReferance\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eTelomere ∆∆Cq\u0026nbsp;results\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eof\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003edentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed to non-ionizing radiation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"604\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTelomer \u0026nbsp;∆∆Cq\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReferance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.780\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e61,95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-3,86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.879\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs restorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2,27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.023\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.520\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.716\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.721\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.086\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.790\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 97px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.801\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eComet assay results of dentist and healthcare personnel who were occupationally exposed non- ionizing radiation and control groups\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"604\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHead Lenght\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e407,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e103,58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1681,67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-16.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e207,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43,82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs periodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-15.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e200,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e63,05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs orthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-8.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e393,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e98,44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e402,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e120,60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e393,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e79,66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e374,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e104,13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e328,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e103,00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTail Lenght\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e732,12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-16.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e214.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs pedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e156.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs endodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-11.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e168.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs periodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-7.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e109.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs prosthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e175.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e121.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs restorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e266.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e153.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs ortodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-8.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e123.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e92.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComet Lenght\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e490.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e137.125\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e844,16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-4.600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e424.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e92.528\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs pedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-9.059\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e363.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e107.136\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs endodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-6.328\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e570.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e126.598\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs periodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-3.380\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e532.500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e169.112\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs prosthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-7.676\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e585.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e163.689\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs restorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-8.607\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e679.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e198.303\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e453.500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e171.707\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVaiable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHead DNA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e97.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.795\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1843,59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-18.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e74.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.562\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs pedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-16.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e82.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.336\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs endodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.723\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs periodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-9.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e93.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.990\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs prosthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.772\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs restorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e79.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.662\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs orthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-15.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.868\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTail DNA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1,769\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1865,39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-18.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7,252\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs pedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-16.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6,328\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs endodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12.48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5,717\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs periodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-9.48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,960\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs prosthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5,708\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs restorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8,635\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs orthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-15.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10,000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,895\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVaiable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.63046\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1444,36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-18,51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.588\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs pedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-15,92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.105\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs endodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12,92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.482\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs periodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-9,08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.380\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs prosthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13,52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.455\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs restorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13,06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e59.007\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs orthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12,57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.930\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOTM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMedian\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (df))\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Mann-Whitney U)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.743\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1206,24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs oral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-18.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOral and maxillofacial surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.766\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs pedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-15.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePedodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.404\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs endodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.931\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs periodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-9.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriodontology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.583\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs prosthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProsthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.246\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs restorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRestorative dentistry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl vs orthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-12.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodontics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.366\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 49px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 60px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e"},{"header":"Graphs","content":"\u003cp\u003eGraphs 1 to 10 are available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Electromagnetic field, occupational exposure, dentist, effect, telomere, DNA damage","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7300847/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7300847/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eAs a result of technological advances, the number and variety of high-tech tools and devices used in routine dental practice have rapidly increased. There is a lack of research on the potential effects of these EMF-emitting devices. This study investigated the effects of occupational electromagnetic field exposure on telomere length and DNA damage in dentists and healthcare professionals.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted in two groups: control and exposure groups. The control group consisted of healthy volunteers (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7) not employed in dentistry, while the exposure groups consisted of 131 dentists and healthcare professionals working in the departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, orthodontics, pedodontics, periodontics, prosthodontics, and restorative dentistry. Telomere length was assessed from serum samples, and DNA damage was assessed from lymphocytes. Power density (S) was measured in dental clinics. Electric and magnetic field values were calculated from the S value.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen seven different clinics were compared, a significant increase in DNA damage and a significant decrease in telomere length were found (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). The highest DNA damage and shortest telomeres were observed in the oral and maxillofacial surgery. Electromagnetic field values were also highest in the oral and maxillofacial surgery. Consequently, electromagnetic fields may pose a significant health risk to potentially exposed workers.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Effect of occupational exposure of dentists and healthcare personnel to electromagnetic fields on telomere length and DNA damage","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-17 18:47:24","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7300847/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-12-22T13:37:35+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-12-19T09:34:38+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"198293310065095911243799769461759851638","date":"2025-11-25T03:45:09+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-10-21T09:19:38+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"73784157593156879498416395866264739270","date":"2025-10-06T23:49:09+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"10735326062004567050415015589617735272","date":"2025-09-15T06:52:31+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-09T20:02:27+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-09-09T14:46:30+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-08-20T12:32:20+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-08-20T08:31:34+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Scientific Reports","date":"2025-08-20T08:20:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"2daccdbd-7a48-4898-92c9-f66722aa8ba1","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 17th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"in-revision","subjectAreas":[{"id":54753284,"name":"Health sciences/Diseases"},{"id":54753285,"name":"Health sciences/Health care"},{"id":54753286,"name":"Health sciences/Health occupations"},{"id":54753287,"name":"Health sciences/Medical research"},{"id":54753288,"name":"Health sciences/Risk factors"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-22T14:17:22+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-17 18:47:24","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7300847","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7300847","identity":"rs-7300847","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}