Dataset Information

Effect of spray air settings of speed-increasing contra-angle handpieces on intrapulpal temperatures, drilling times, and coolant spray pattern.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Decreasing aerosol leaks are of great interest, especially in the recent era of COVID-19. The aim was to investigate intrapulpal heat development, coolant spray patterns, and the preparation efficiency of speed-increasing contra-angle handpieces with the spray air on (mist) or off (water jet) settings during restorative cavity preparations.

Methods

Standard-sized cavities were prepared in 80 extracted intact human molar teeth using diamond cylindrical drills with a 1:5 speed-increasing contra-angle handpiece. A custom-made device maintained the standardized lateral drilling force (3 N) and predetermined depth. Temperatures were measured using intrapulpal thermocouple probes. The four experimental groups were as follows: mist cooling mode at 15 mL/min (AIR15), water jet cooling mode at 15 mL/min (JET15), mist cooling mode at 30 mL/min (AIR30), and water jet cooling mode at 30 mL/min (JET30). The coolant spray pattern was captured using macro-photo imaging.

Results

The JET15 group had the highest increase in temperature (ΔT = 6.02 °C), while JET30 (ΔT = 2.24 °C; p < 0.001), AIR15 (ΔT = 3.34 °C; p = 0.042), and AIR30 (ΔT = 2.95 °C; p = 0.003) had significantly lower increases in temperature. Fine mist aerosol was formed in the AIR15 and AIR30 preparations but not in the JET15 and JET30 preparations (p < 0.001). The irrigation mode had no influence on the preparation time (p = 0.672).

Conclusions

Water jet irrigation using coolant at 30 mL/min appeared to be the optimal mode. Considering the safe intrapulpal temperatures and the absence of fine mist aerosols, this mode can be recommended for restorative cavity preparations.

Clinical significance

To increase infection control in dental practices, the water jet irrigation mode of speed-increasing handpieces with coolant flow rates of 30 mL/min should be considered for restorative cavity preparations.

SUBMITTER: Lempel E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8212794 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The influence of elevated air temperatures recorded in various urban microenvironments in adversely impacting biologically relevant disease end points has not yet been extensively tackled. This study is a post hoc analysis of the TEMP pilot trial, a randomized 2 × 2 cross-over trial that examined changes in metabolic and stress hormonal profiles of healthy adults in two settings (urban vs. rural) with distinctly different climatological characteristics during the Mediterranean summer. This analysis aimed to study the association between the 24-h personal air or skin temperature sensor measurements and the diary-based location type (indoors vs. outdoors) in urban (seaside) vs. rural (higher in altitude) microenvironments. Out of 41 eligible participants, a total of 37 participants were included in this post-hoc TEMP trial analysis. Wearable sensors recorded personal air temperature, skin temperature, and activity (as a surrogate marker of physical activity) in each setting, while a time-stamped personal diary recorded the types of indoor or outdoor activities. Temperature peaks during the 24-h sampling period were detected using a peak finding algorithm. Mixed effect logistic regression models were fitted for the odds of participant location (being indoors vs. outdoors) as a function of setting (urban vs. rural) and sensor-based personal temperature data (either raw temperature values or number of temperature peaks). During the study period (July–end of September), median [interquartile range, IQR] personal air temperature in the rural (higher altitude) settings was 1.5 °C lower than that in the urban settings (27.1 °C [25.4, 29.2] vs. 28.6 °C [27.1, 30.5], p < 0.001), being consistent with the Mediterranean climate. Median [IQR] personal air temperature in indoor (micro)environments was lower than those in outdoors (28.0 °C [26.4, 30.3] vs 28.5 °C [26.8, 30.7], p < 0.001). However, median [IQR] skin temperature was higher in indoor (micro)environments vs. outdoors (34.8 °C [34.0, 35.6] and 33.9 °C [32.9, 34.8], p < 0.001) and the number of both personal air and skin temperature peaks was higher indoors compared to outdoors (median [IQR] 3.0 [2.0,4.0] vs 1.0 [1.0,1.3], p < 0.007, for the skin sensors). A significant association between the number of temperature peaks and indoor location types was observed with either the personal air sensor (OR 3.1; 95% CI 1.2–8.2; p = 0.02) or the skin sensor (OR 3.7; 95% CI 1.4–9.9; p = 0.01), suggesting higher number of indoor air temperature fluctuations. Amidst the global climate crisis, more population health studies or personalized medicine approaches that utilize continuous tracking of individual-level air/skin temperatures in both indoor/outdoor locations would be warranted, if we were to better characterize the disease phenotype in response to climate change manifestations.