{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012434554973821989, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002617801047120419, 'mean_word_length': 5.506382978723404, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Dentists' attitudes toward mandatory screening of dental personnel for infectious diseases and the continued practice of infected dental personnel.

The issues surrounding mandatory screening of dental personnel for infectious diseases and the rights of infected dental personnel to continue to practice are beginning to receive greater attention. In order to examine Maryland dentists' attitudes on these issues, a mail survey of all Maryland dentists was conducted. Approximately half of all respondents favored mandatory screening for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) and hepatitis for any dental personnel with direct patient contact. The majority of respondents did not believe that dentists or auxiliaries with AIDS or hepatitis should be permitted to treat patients. Approximately 31% of the respondents favored continued practice for dentists with hepatitis, while 21% believed dentists with AIDS should be allowed to continue to treat patients. In general, more recent graduates were less likely to favor mandatory screening and were more likely to favor the continued practice of infected dentists. Additionally, those respondents who were willing to treat patients with AIDS or hepatitis were less likely to favor mandatory screening and more likely to favor the continued practice of infected dental personnel. It is important for the profession to begin a dialogue to determine if there is a need for criteria for mandatory screening and guidelines for the continued practice of infected dental personnel.