This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Frances Taylor, MD, MPH
San Francisco, Calif

JAMA. 1991;266(14):1935.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—The two articles^1,2 about human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in a dentist and his patients focused on the fact that the infected dentist was a health care provider and ignored the fact that he was also a patient in his own practice.³ The consequence of this is to place the serological status of the provider under severe scrutiny while ignoring infection control and sterilization techniques used on other patients during invasive procedures.

If it were this man's role as patient rather than as practitioner that resulted in transmission, it would not have been the serological status of the provider that mattered. As a consumer of dental care, my current concern is not what the status of my dentist may be but what sterilization, disinfection, and any other protection procedures his or her office uses against cross contamination.

The Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report report states . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Deputy Editor (West), and Bruce B. Dan, MD, Senior Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?