(1) Background: Frequent contact of the dentist with potentially infectious material (PIM) is undeniable. The aim of the study was to determine the frequency and type of injuries, as well as to identify barriers to reporting and barriers to the implementation of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) among dentists from urban and rural areas. (2) Methods: We surveyed 192 dentists using an anonymous questionnaire. (3) Results: During the 12 months preceding the survey, 63% of dentists from the village and 58.8% of dentists from the city suffered at least one superficial cut, and deep cuts 15.1% and 17.6% respectively. Contact with PIM through spitting on the conjunctiva was 58.9% and 52.1% (village vs. city). Needle stick injuries were 50.4% and fingers were affected in 48.8% cases. The causes of injuries were: inattention 54.7%, rush 27%, unpredictable behavior of the patient 19%, recapping 18.2%. Work in the countryside was associated with a 1.95-times greater chance of not reporting injuries. The distance from a hospital with antiretroviral treatment may be a barrier to the implementation of PEP. (4) Conclusion: The circumstances of the injuries and the reasons for not applying for antiretroviral treatment point to the areas of necessary dentist education in this topic.
Keywords: dentists; needle stick injuries; occupational exposures; post-exposure prophylaxis; reporting; sharp injuries.