Thursday, February 22, 2018

Interim Estimates of 2017–18 Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness — United States, February 2018

Here is some interesting info courtesy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  It seems that with this year’s intense and difficult flu season, the success of the flu vaccine has been a bit limited.  The vaccine overall is “only 36 percent effective”.  However, there’s a lot more data on the vaccine than just that.  Read on for info from the CDC:

In the United States, annual vaccination against seasonal influenza is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months (1). During each influenza season since 2004–05, CDC has estimated the effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza associated with medically attended acute respiratory illness (ARI). This report uses data from 4,562 children and adults enrolled in the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (U.S. Flu VE Network) during November 2, 2017–February 3, 2018. During this period, overall adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza A and influenza B virus infection associated with medically attended ARI was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 27%–44%). Most (69%) influenza infections were caused by A(H3N2) viruses. VE was estimated to be 25% (CI = 13% to 36%) against illness caused by influenza A(H3N2) virus, 67% (CI = 54%–76%) against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses, and 42% (CI = 25%–56%) against influenza B viruses. These early VE estimates underscore the need for ongoing influenza prevention and treatment measures. CDC continues to recommend influenza vaccination because the vaccine can still prevent some infections with currently circulating influenza viruses, which are expected to continue circulating for several weeks. Even with current vaccine effectiveness estimates, vaccination will still prevent influenza illness, including thousands of hospitalizations and deaths. Persons aged ≥6 months who have not yet been vaccinated this season should be vaccinated.

Methods used by the U.S. Flu VE Network have been published previously (2). At five study sites,* patients aged ≥6 months seeking outpatient medical care for an ARI with cough within 7 days of illness onset were enrolled. Study enrollment began after local surveillance identified increasing weekly influenza activity or one or more laboratory-confirmed cases of influenza per week for 2 consecutive weeks. Patients were eligible for enrollment if they 1) were aged ≥6 months on September 1, 2017, and thus were eligible for vaccination; 2) reported an ARI with cough with onset ≤7 days earlier; and 3) had not been treated with influenza antiviral medication (e.g., oseltamivir) during this illness. After obtaining informed consent from patients or from parents or guardians for their children, participants or their proxies were interviewed to collect demographic data, information on general and current health status and symptoms, and 2017–18 influenza vaccination status. Nasal and oropharyngeal swabs (or nasal swabs alone for children aged <2 years) were collected to obtain respiratory specimens; nasal and oropharyngeal swabs were placed together in a single cryovial with viral transport medium. Specimens were tested at U.S. Flu VE Network laboratories using CDC’s real-time reverse transcription polymerase–chain reaction (rRT-PCR) protocol for detection and identification of influenza viruses. Participants (including children aged <9 years, who require 2 vaccine doses during their first vaccination season) were considered vaccinated if they received ≥1 dose of any seasonal influenza vaccine ≥14 days before illness onset, according to medical records and registries (at the Wisconsin site); medical records and self-report (at the Washington site); or self-report only (at the Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Texas sites). VE against all influenza virus types combined and against viruses by type/subtype was estimated as 100% x (1 – odds ratio).† Estimates were adjusted for study site, age group, sex, race/ethnicity, self-rated general health, number of days from illness onset to enrollment, and week of illness (3-week intervals) using logistic regression. Interim VE estimates for the 2017–18 season were based on patients enrolled through February 3, 2018.

Among the 4,562 children and adults with ARI enrolled at the five study sites from November 2, 2017, through February 3, 2018, a total of 1,712 (38%) tested positive for influenza virus by rRT-PCR, including 1,392 (81%) influenza A viruses and 323 (19%) influenza B viruses (Table 1). Among 1,340 subtyped influenza A viruses, 1,143 (85%) were A(H3N2) viruses and 208 (16%) were A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses. Most (98%) influenza B viruses belonged to the B/Yamagata lineage. The proportion of patients with influenza differed by study site, sex, age group, race/ethnicity, self-rated health status, and interval from illness onset to enrollment (Table 1). The percentage of patients who were vaccinated ranged from 45% to 59% among study sites and differed by sex, age group, race/ethnicity, and self-rated health status.

Among ARI patient participants, 43% of those with influenza had received the 2017–18 seasonal influenza vaccine, compared with 53% of influenza-negative participants (Table 2). After adjusting for study site, age group, sex, race/ethnicity, self-rated general health, number of days from illness onset to enrollment, and week of illness onset (3-week intervals), VE against medically attended ARI caused by all influenza virus types combined was 36% (CI = 27%–44%). VE for all ages was 25% (CI = 13% to 36%) against medically attended ARI caused by A(H3N2) virus infection, 67% (CI = 54%–76%) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection, and 42% (CI = 25%–56%) against influenza B virus infection. VE point estimates against medically attended influenza for all virus types varied by age group; statistically significant protection against medically attended influenza was found among children aged 6 months through 8 years (VE = 59%; CI = 44%–69%) and adults aged 18–49 years (VE = 33%; CI = 16%–47%), whereas no statistically significant protection was observed in other age groups.

As of February 3, 2018, a total of 257 influenza A(H3N2) viruses from U.S. Flu VE Network participants had been characterized by CDC; 240 (93%) belonged to either genetic group 3C.2a (226 viruses) or the related subgroup 3C.2a1 (14), whereas 17 (7%) belonged to group 3C.3a. Genetic group 3C.2a includes the A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 reference virus representing the A(H3N2) component of the 2017–18 Northern Hemisphere influenza vaccines (3).
Early and widespread influenza activity during the 2017–18 influenza season provided the opportunity to estimate interim VE against several circulating influenza viruses, including the predominant A(H3N2) virus. These interim estimates reflect ongoing challenges with the A(H3N2) vaccine component since the 2011–12 season. The interim estimate of 25% VE against A(H3N2) viruses this season indicates that vaccination provided some protection, in contrast to recently reported, nonsignificant interim estimates of 17% from Canada and 10% from Australia (4,5) and is similar to final (32%) VE estimates in the United States against A(H3N2) viruses during 2016–17§ (6). However, among children aged 6 months through 8 years, the interim estimates against any influenza and A(H3N2) virus infection were higher; the risk for A(H3N2) associated medically-attended influenza illness was reduced by more than half (59%) among vaccinated children. Also, with interim VE estimates of 67% and 42% against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses, respectively, vaccination provided substantial protection against circulating A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses, as well as moderate protection against influenza B viruses predominantly belonging to the B/Yamagata lineage, the second influenza type B component included in quadrivalent vaccines. CDC continues to recommend influenza vaccination while influenza viruses are circulating in the community; several more weeks of influenza activity are likely. Influenza vaccination has prevented thousands of hospitalizations during previous seasons when influenza A(H3N2) viruses were predominant, including during the 2014–15 season when interim VE estimates were similar to those reported here. Appropriate use of influenza antiviral medications for treatment of severely ill persons or persons at high risk for complications from influenza who develop influenza symptoms is important, especially among older adults, who currently have the highest hospitalization rates (3).

VE estimates against A(H3N2) viruses have been lower than estimates against A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses for several years (7). Although there is no definitive evidence for antigenic drift of viruses circulating this season compared with cell culture–propagated reference viruses representing the A(H3N2) vaccine component (3), challenges with antigenic characterization of recent A(H3N2) viruses, many of which could not be characterized using traditional hemagglutination inhibition assays, have required the use of additional virus neutralization assays to assess antigenic characteristics. Multiple factors might be contributing to the reported VE against A(H3N2) viruses this season. Immune responses to vaccination differ by age and previous infection or vaccination history and can affect vaccine protection; higher VE against A(H3N2) viruses among young children suggests that vaccination might provide better protection against circulating A(H3N2) viruses to this age group. Also, genetic changes in the vaccine virus hemagglutinin protein that arise during passage in eggs might result in a vaccine immune response that is less effective against circulating viruses (8,9). Human serologic data indicate decreased inhibition of circulating cell culture–propagated A(H3N2) viruses compared with egg-propagated viruses among persons vaccinated with egg-based vaccines.¶ Additional studies are needed to assess whether VE against circulating A(H3N2) viruses varies by vaccine type, including comparisons between egg-based and non–egg-based vaccines. CDC will continue to monitor VE through the remainder of the season and is investigating these factors. In addition, many efforts are under way to improve selection and development of candidate vaccine viruses that are optimal for vaccine production and provide protection against a majority of circulating viruses.

These interim VE estimates underscore the need for influenza antiviral treatment for any patient with suspected or confirmed influenza who is hospitalized, has severe or progressive illness, or is at high risk for complications from influenza, regardless of vaccination status or results of rapid, point-of-care influenza diagnostic tests.** CDC recommends antiviral medications as an adjunct to vaccination, and their potential public health benefit is increased in the context of low VE. A CDC health update issued December 27, 2017, regarding treatment with antiviral medications is available at Clinicians should be aware that influenza activity is widespread, and influenza should be considered as a possible diagnosis in all patients with acute respiratory illness.

The findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations. First, vaccination status included self-report at four of five sites. End-of-season VE estimates based on updated documentation of vaccination status might differ from interim estimates. Second, information from medical records and immunization registries is needed to evaluate VE by vaccine type and for fully vaccinated versus partially vaccinated children, as well as to evaluate the effects of previous season vaccination and timing of vaccination; end-of-season analysis of VE by vaccine type and effects of partial or previous season vaccination is planned. Third, an observational study design has greater potential for confounding and bias relative to randomized clinical trials. However, the test-negative design is widely used in VE studies and has been used by the U.S. Flu VE Network to estimate VE for previous influenza seasons. Finally, small sample sizes in some age groups resulted in wide confidence intervals, and end-of-season VE estimates could change as additional patient data become available or if there is a change in circulating viruses late in the season. It is also important to note that the VE estimates in this report are limited to the prevention of outpatient medical visits rather than more severe illness outcomes, such as hospitalization or death; data from studies measuring VE against more severe outcomes will be available at a later date.

Annual monitoring of VE supports ongoing efforts to improve influenza vaccines. Although more effective vaccines are needed, vaccination prevents a substantial burden of influenza-related illness annually. During the 2014–15 season, when VE against medically attended illness caused by any influenza virus was less than 20%, vaccination was estimated to prevent 11,000–144,000 influenza-associated hospitalizations and 300–4,000 influenza-associated deaths ( Small increases in VE can substantially affect the number of hospitalizations prevented during a severe season (10). Although interim estimates suggest that vaccination has prevented some influenza-related illness this season, influenza vaccines with improved effectiveness are needed to substantially reduce the incidence of disease.
Jennifer K. Meece, Jennifer P. King, Madalyn Palmquist, Lynn Ivacic, Carla Rottscheit, Sarah Kopitzke, Jacklyn Salzwedel, Deanna Cole, Trish Aldrich, Jennifer Anderson, Elizabeth Armagost, Cory Arnold, Marya Theresa Balinghasay, Kaleigh Bettinger Terry Foss, Dyan Friemoth, Wayne Frome, Keith Gilge, Sherri Guzinski, Tara Johnson, Julie Karl, Diane Kohnhorst, Tamara Kronenwetter Koepel, Karen McGreevey, Nidhi Mehta, Vicki Moon, Lisa Ott, Maisie Pettinger, Rebecca Pilsner, DeeAnn Polacek, Martha Presson, Emily Redmond, Megan Sauer, Eleanor Stockheimer, Patrick Stockwell, Sandy Strey, Julie Zierer, Tom Dalcher, Gregg Greenwald, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, Wisconsin; Joshua G. Petrie, Lois E. Lamerato, Ryan E. Malosh, E.J. McSpadden, Hannah Segaloff, Caroline K. Cheng, Rachel Truscon, Emileigh Johnson, Anne Kaniclides, Elizabeth Alleman, Sarah Bauer, Michelle Groesbeck, Emerson Bouldin, Christoph Baker, Kimberly Berke, Mackenzie Smith, Niharika Rajesh, Kristyn Brundidge, Neha Hafeez, Jayla Jackson, Ian Anastasia, Gabriel Kadoo, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan; G.K. Balasubramani, Todd M. Bear, Heather Eng, Samantha Ford, Edward Garofolo, Robert Hickey, Philip Iozzi, Monika Johnson, Donald B. Middleton, Krissy K. Moehling, Jonathan M. Raviotta, Evelyn C. Reis, Bret Rosenblum, Sean Saul, Theresa Sax, Michael Susick, Joe Suyama, Leonard F. Urbanski, John V. Williams, University of Pittsburgh Schools of the Health Sciences and University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Michael Smith, Chandni Raiyani, Lydia Clipper, Teresa Ponder, Todd Crumbaker, Mary Kylberg, Martha Zayed, Melissa Zdroik, Kimberley Walker, Marcus Volz, Arundhati Rao, Robert Fader, Lea Mallett, Hania Wehbe-Janek, Madhava Beeram, Michael Reis, Jennifer Thomas, Jaime Walkowiak, Jeremy Ray, Renee Day, Deborah Price, Jennifer Fox, Robert Probe, Baylor Scott & White Health, Texas A&M University Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, Texas; Erika Kiniry, Stacie Wellwood, C. Hallie Phillips, Suzie Park, Lawrence Madziwa, Matt Nguyen, Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington; Erin Burns, Rebecca Garten, Thomas Stark, Shoshona Le, Juliana DaSilva, Influenza Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC.

Conflict of Interest
No conflicts of interest were reported.

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Academy of Laser Dentistry’s Upcoming Annual Meeting Features an Abundance of Dental Team Training


If you are looking to expand your laser skills or if you are a new comer to lasers and are looking to learn as much as possible before using them, the Academy of Laser Dentistry meeting is a great place to be.  Here’s info on what this year’s meeting has to offer:


Coral Springs, FL – February 19, 2018 – The Academy of Laser Dentistry (ALD), is emphasizing a team approach to laser dentistry during ALD 2018, Dentistry’s Laser Meeting. The event is taking place from April 26-28th at the Caribe Royale in Orlando, Florida.

According to ALD’s executive director, Gail Siminovsky, “Laser dentistry delivers better patient outcomes when the entire dental team is well-trained on the many applications, specific techniques and sensible safety procedures related to this technology. That’s why in Orlando, there’s a strong focus on team training.” Here are some examples of ALD 2018’s team-friendly program:

Keynote: “Tongue Tied: A Story Not Silenced by Oral Cancer” presented by Eva Grayzel, Six Step Screening

Roundtable Discussion: “Straight Talk on Diode Lasers: Scientific and Practical Rationale for Clinical Dentistry” moderated by Georgios Romanos, PhD, DDS. Periodontology, Stony Brook University
“The more the dental team knows about laser technology and the business of dentistry, the better the health of your patients and practice, explains Siminovsky, “The ALD supports our valuable auxiliary team members with outstanding presenters and topics.”

Lecture: “What to Say to Get the Pay- Coding, Billing, Scripting,” presented by Karen S. Parker, RDH, BSDH

Lecture: “Laser Use During Implant Care,” presented by Heather Angers, RDH

Lecture: “Photobiomodulation: Applications and Results,” presented by Mary Lynn Smith, RDH, Associate in Applied Science

Lecture: “Non-Surgical Periodontal Treatment Planning,” presented by Mary Lynn Smith, RDH

Workshop: “Give 'Em a Hand: Hygiene Hands-On,” presented by Angie Wallace, RDH and Jeanette Miranda, RDH

Workshop: The Team Approach to Laser Use - Lasers and the Dental Assistant, presented by Angie Wallace, RDH and Jeanette Miranda, RDH

“Today’s successful practice marketing requires the entire dental team to be practice ambassadors on social media, in the office and in the community,” says Siminovsky. “That’s why we’ve included marketing-oriented courses appropriate for the entire team.”

Lecture: “Growing Your Patient Base Through Effective Digital Marketing” presented by Corey Auger, Crystal Clear Digital Marketing

Lecture: “OMG! I Got A Bad Review. What Do I Do?” presented by Leonard Tau, DMD. PCDE

Lecture: “Why Your Staff is Your Most Important Asset” presented by Corey Auger, Crystal Clear Digital Marketing
For detailed and up to date information about ALD 2018, including courses, exhibitors, social events and registration, click here.

About the Academy of Laser Dentistry
The Academy of Laser Dentistry (ALD) is the only independent and unbiased non-profit association devoted to laser dentistry and includes clinicians, academicians and researchers in all laser wavelengths. The Academy is devoted to clinical education, research, and the development of standards and guidelines for the safe and effective use of dental laser technology. ALD was founded in 1993, with the merging of the International Academy of Laser Dentistry, the North American Academy of Laser Dentistry and the American Academy of Laser Dentistry. For more information, visit

About ALD2018:
ALD’s upcoming annual meeting (ALD2018) promises to be the Academy’s biggest annual event to date. This year’s theme is “Innovation, Illumination, Imagination – Celebrating Laser Dentistry 25 Years and Beyond.” ALD2018 will take place from April 26-28th at the Caribe Royale Orlando, Florida. For more information and to register, visit

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

RecordLinc Launches Patient-To-Patient Online Dentist Referral Software I LUV MY DENTIST

RecordLinc Logo.jpg
Today, after months of successful beta testing, RecordLinc, a dental practice management software company, announces the official launch of “I LUV MY DENTIST”, the newest addition to their suite of automation products. This web-based software gives patients a simple way to submit word of mouth referrals using email, texting, and social media platforms. The fully automated system seamlessly integrates with the most popular practice management systems and requires no team training. Once “I LUV MY DENTIST” is installed, it operates on autopilot, inviting top patients to refer friends to dental practices by sharing contact information. “70% of patients say they chose their dentist based on a word of mouth referral and we make it easy to increase word of mouth referrals,” said Travis Rodgers, CEO of RecordLinc.
Another feature of “I LUV MY DENTIST” is the addition of positive testimonials listed directly on the dental office website. “When your existing patients like and trust you, they’re your strongest advocates,” said Rodgers. “To celebrate the launch, we are sharing the ‘LUV’ with our customers.  For a limited time, we’ll waive the startup fee, offer 50% off the monthly service cost, and 100% of the proceeds this week will go to the DonateDentist non-profit.”
More on the Valentine’s Day Offer, visit
To learn more about “I Luv My Dentist” and how it can make it easier for your patients to refer, visit 
Luv My Dentist Logo.png

Monday, February 19, 2018

FTC Sues Dental Products Distributors for Alleged Conspiracy Not to Provide Discounts to a Customer Segment

FTC Logo.png


Complaint names nation’s three largest dental suppliers: Benco Dental Supply Company, Henry Schein, Inc. and Patterson Companies, Inc.

The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against the nation’s three largest dental supply companies, a public version of which will be linked to this news release shortly, alleging that they violated U.S. antitrust laws by conspiring to refuse to provide discounts to or otherwise serve buying groups representing dental practitioners. These buying groups sought lower prices for dental supplies and equipment on behalf of solo and small-group dental practices seeking to gain discounts by aggregating and leveraging the collective purchasing power and bargaining skills of the individual practices. The complaint also alleges an FTC Act Section 5 violation against Benco for inviting a fourth competing distributor to join the conspiracy.

The alleged agreement among Benco, Henry Schein and Patterson deprived independent dentists of the benefits of participating in buying groups that purchase dental supplies from national, full-service distributors. As full-service dental distributors, Benco, Henry Schein and Patterson offer gloves, cements, sterilization products and a range of other consumable supplies, as well as equipment, such as dental chairs and lights. Collectively, the big three control more than 85 percent of all distributor sales of dental products and services nationwide. The U.S. market for dental products is valued at approximately $10 billion. The dental practices that would have benefited from the discounts achieved by these buying groups were small businesses comprised of solo or small groups of dentists.

Benco and Henry Schein allegedly entered into an agreement refusing to provide discounts to or compete for the business of buying groups. The complaint details communications between executives of the two companies evidencing the agreement, as well as attempts to monitor and ensure compliance with the agreement. The complaint also asserts that Patterson joined the agreement. The complaint charges Benco, Henry Schein and Patterson of conspiring in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.

The complaint also alleges that on multiple occasions, Benco invited Burkhart Dental Supply – a regional distributor and the fourth largest full-service distributor in the United States – to refuse to provide discounts to buying groups. As a result of this conduct, the complaint separately charges Benco with a Section 5 invitation to collude count.

Based on the agreement among the distributors, the complaint contends that Benco, Henry Schein and Patterson unreasonably restrained price competition for dental products in the United States; distorted prices and undermined the ability of independent dentists to obtain lower prices and discounts for dental products; deprived independent dentists of the benefits of vigorous price and service competition among full-service, national dental distributors; unreasonably reduced output of dental products to dental buying groups; and eliminated or reduced the competitive bidding process for sales to these buying groups. This case reflects the Commission’s ongoing efforts to ensure competition in the healthcare industry.

The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint was 2-0. The administrative trial is scheduled to begin on Oct. 16, 2018.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. A complaint constitutes an allegation, but does not constitute a determination that the law has been violated as alleged.

Thursday, February 15, 2018

Ultradent Mosaic Composite & Why it Made My Top 5 Test Drives


I love it when companies “get it right,” and Mosaic is one of those products. Ultradentworked on development of their next generation composite for several years, but they refused to bring it to market until they were absolutely convinced that they had exceeded everyone’s expectations. Suffice to say, “Mission accomplished!” Ultradent has succeeded in creating a composite that quickly became one of my favorites.

The thing that immediately struck me was how easy it is to manipulate. The biggest complaint I have about composites in general is that they tend to stick to the instruments we use. Mosaic was specifically designed to overcome that problem and the result is phenomenal. You can move the material around like thick cake icing without stickiness and it stays where you put it, allowing for total control during clinical manipulation.

Mosaic is a great material, no matter which tooth you are repairing. A composite is dependent on its filler particles for both its strength and its esthetics. This material is designed with a very nice balance of fillers so that it fulfills the properties for use anywhere in the mouth. It has exceptional aesthetics for anterior restorations and high compressive strength (486.4mpa) for durable posterior restorations. 

Mosaic comes in 20 shades and, much to the delight of many users, Ultradent has gone back to the traditional shading nomenclature. There are a variety of dentin shades that are slightly translucent and work well in the posterior, while the enamel shades have variable opacity that allows for a single shade in small areas. Of course, for large Class IV fractures, layering can be done utilizing a combination of dentin and enamel shades. 

The shade guide is made of the actual composite you’ll be using for a more accurate shade assessment, and a flexible shade tab holder allows for bending around the patient’s face to compare multiple shades at once.

If you are looking for a new workhorse composite, be sure to check out Mosaic.

Wednesday, February 14, 2018

MouthWatch, LLC Debuts its TeleDent™ Referral Engine Starter Kit for Specialists and GPs During the Chicago Midwinter Meeting

I’ve been lucky enough to be working with the TeleDent™ platform for the last couple of months.  I’ve been impressed with both the software and the MouthWatch intraoral camera.  With the Chicago MidWinter meeting rapidly approaching, I thought I’d let you know about a special offer from the company.  If you’re going to be in Chicago (I’ll be there for sure) be sure to stop by the MouthWatch booth #4143 and check out the new TeleDent™ Referral Engine Starter Kit.  I’ve been pretty impressed with what this company is doing and I think you’ll be impressed as well.


Newly-Developed Product Configuration and Special Pricing
Enables Affordable, Out of the Box Clinical Collaboration

Metuchen, NJ – February 6, 2018 – MouthWatch, LLC a leader in intraoral imaging, digital case presentation and teledentistry solutions, will introduce its TeleDent™ Referral Engine Starter Kit at booth #4143 during the 2018 Chicago Midwinter Meeting.

According to MouthWatch CEO Brant Herman, “For this year’s Midwinter Meeting we’ve created a new configuration of our TeleDent™ all-in-one teledentistry platform to enable out of the box clinical collaboration.” The TeleDent Referral Engine Starter Kit includes the following:

• 2 MouthWatch Intraoral Cameras
• 2 Windows 10 Convertible Laptops
• 2 licenses for TeleDent - MouthWatch’s Cloud-Based, HIPAA-Compliant Software
• 2 Online Sessions for Training and Workflow Integration
• Waived Set-Up Fee

During the Chicago Midwinter Meeting, The TeleDent Referral Engine Starter Kit will be priced at $1,999 and include a 1-year hardware warranty. Custom configurations are also available. “This is not a one size fits all solution,” adds Herman. “For example, one provider may already have a computer that they wish to use. Or perhaps collaboration will occur between three or more clinicians in multiple locations. Let us build a TeleDent Referral Engine for you.”
The cost-effectiveness of the TeleDent™ platform make it well-suited for many private practice teledentistry applications. In fact, it can be a catalyst for enhanced collaborative care and increased referrals. Other benefits include improved patient experiences, simplified workflow and easier communication amongst the care team.

Specialist / GP Collaboration – Increased referrals and efficient case collaboration for predictable patient outcomes– especially on complex cases.

Sleep Apnea Dentist / Sleep Medicine Physician Collaboration - Cultivate referral networks with sleep physicians whose patients are seeking a medically-prescribed CPAP alternative.

Oral-Systemic Health Collaboration – Co-management of medically-compromised patients diagnosed with oral disease to reduce systemic disease progression, mitigate risk and achieve an improved state of wellness.

Dentist / Dental Lab Collaboration – Dentists and dental lab operators can
share CBCT images, digital impression files and patient photos to increase case accuracy and ultimately ensure patient satisfaction.

For more information about MouthWatch, visit www., call 877-544-4342 or send an email to You can also download the brochure, “Teledentistry for Private Practice Collaboration” by clicking here.

About MouthWatch, LLC:
Headquartered in Metuchen, New Jersey, MouthWatch, LLC is a leader in intraoral imaging devices, digital case presentation tools and teledentistry solutions. The company is dedicated to finding new ways to constantly improve the dental health experience for both patient and provider.

The founders and management team of MouthWatch have relevant backgrounds and successful track records in dentistry, consumer products and communications. Since 2012, this team has pioneered the integration of digital imagery and communications technology in the field of dentistry. Their cumulative experience makes it possible for the company to take the lead in introducing the benefits of telemedicine to the world of dentistry.

Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Avalon NeoMTA Plus® Named Top Endodontic Reparative Cement for Fourth Straight Year

Avalong Biomed Logo.jpg

I’ve been a user of NeoMTA plus for well over a year now.  MTA has become a “Go To” product for many practicing clinical dentistry as it allows us to help patients keep their teeth for a lifetime.  Back in the day, MTA was difficult to use as well as extremely expensive.  However, in the last 3 years or so, we have seen several companies bring MTA to market with ease of use and affordable pricing.  One of those companies is Avalon BioMed with their product NeoMTA Plus.  Here’s some new info on the product:

Avalon Biomed, a division of NuSmile Ltd., announced today that its Avalon NeoMTA Plus has been named “Top Product” for the Endodontic Reparative Cement category by THE DENTAL ADVISOR for the fourth consecutive year.

“We’re thrilled to have THE DENTAL ADVISOR’s expert group of clinical advisors bestow this prestigious honor on Avalon NeoMTA Plus four years in a row,” said Mark Binford, Avalon Biomed Senior Vice President. “We pride ourselves on this breakthrough product’s ability to offer endodontists and general dentists a combination of versatility, ease of use, and remarkable affordability they simply can’t get from any other dental bioceramic material.”

NeoMTA Plus is a stain-proof, tricalcium silicate-based bioceramic cement that can be used universally for a wide variety of endodontic treatments including pulp therapy. Priced at roughly one- fifth the price of the best-known MTA brands, NeoMTA Plus is praised for its superior abilities to mix smoothly, place easily, resist washout, set quickly and avoid staining.

THE DENTAL ADVISOR awards, among the most highly coveted honors in the dental industry, were created to recognize quality products and equipment whose superiority is documented through clinical and evidence-based research.

For more information on NeoMTA Plus or other Avalon Biomed products, call (941) 896-9948 or visit


About Avalon Biomed

Avalon Biomed, a wholly owned division of NuSmile Ltd., develops, markets and sells highly differentiated bioceramics for use in restorative dentistry applications. Avalon’s products have a variety of uses in vital pulp therapy and endodontics, from pulpotomy and cavity liners to root-end filling and sealer materials. Dr. Carolyn Primus, a renowned materials scientist and 2016 Dr. Edward B. Shils Award winner, founded Avalon Biomed Inc. in 2011 to develop unique, best-in-class medical devices for dentistry and orthopedics. Avalon products are focused on bioactive, inorganic hydraulic formulas utilizing the latest in materials technology.

NuSmile Ltd., Headquartered in Houston, Texas, NuSmile is a worldwide leader in restorative dentistry products. NuSmile has a passion for quality and innovation and an unmatched dedication to the dental profession and the patients they serve. NuSmile products are offered in over 40 countries around the world.