Aerosol Reduction of 2 Dental Extraoral Scavenger Devices In Vitro.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
Since the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, aerosol control in the operatory has become a key safety issue in dentistry. The utilisation of extraoral scavenger devices (EOSs) is one of the various approaches to in-treatment aerosol reduction in dentistry. The use and efficacy of EOSs in dental settings, however, are still a matter of debate in the literature and there are still open questions about their proper use. Thus, research into this area is essential to inform dental practice. The objective of this study was to examine the aerosol reduction efficacy of two different EOS in vitro.Methods
Two commercially available EOSs were tested during modeled dental treatment in a setup that previously proved to generate high aerosol load. Measurements were done in two particle size ranges: 5.6-560 nm (the full range of the spectrometer) and 60.4-392.4 nm (a range that is especially relevant to the spread of SARS-CoV-2 with aerosol).Results
Both devices managed to reduce the aerosol load to a statistically significant extent as compared to the scenario when only a high-volume evacuator and a saliva ejector (and no EOS) were used.Conclusions
Within the limitations of the study, the results support the assumption that EOSs for aerosol reduction increase in-treatment safety in the dental operatory.
SUBMITTER: Gheorghita D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9159968 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background. Ultrasonic scaling generates aerosols and splatters contaminated with microorganisms, increasing the risk of disease transmission in the dental office. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of extraoral suction (EOS) units in aerosol and splatter reduction during ultrasonic scaling. Methods. Ultrasonic scaling was conducted on a dental manikin headset to simulate a scaling procedure. Water containing Lactobacillus acidophilus at a concentration of 107 colony-forming units per milliliter and 1% fluorescein solution was used as the water supply of the scaler. The scaling procedure was conducted with a high-volume evacuator (HVE) or the combination of HVE and an EOS unit. de Man-Rogosa-Sharpe agar plates were placed at different distances surrounding the dental chair. Filter papers were placed at various positions surrounding the oral cavity and on areas of the body. Results. Bioaerosols were detected at every sampling site and could travel as far as 150 cm from the oral cavity. The combination of HVE and EOS significantly reduced the total number of bacterial colonies in the air (P < 0.001). Dissemination of the stain was in the range of 20 cm from the oral cavity. The maximum contaminated surface area was at the 4 o'clock position from the oral cavity. The combination of EOS and HVE significantly reduced the contaminated area (P < 0.05). The stain was also found on the wrists, chest, abdomen, and lap of the operator and assistant. The lap was the most contaminated area of the body. Conclusion. EOS was effective in reducing the bioaerosols and splatters generated during ultrasonic scaling.
| S-EPMC8538147 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aerosol particles generated by dental procedures could facilitate the transmission of infectious diseases and contain carcinogen particles. Such particles can penetrate common surgical masks and reach the lungs, leading to increased risk for dental care professionals. However, the risk of inhaling contaminated aerosol and the effectiveness of aerosol reduction measures in dental offices remain unclear. The present study aimed to quantify aerosols produced by drilling and scaling procedures and to evaluate present recommendations for aerosol reduction. The concentration of aerosol particles released from the mock scaling and drilling procedures on dental mannequin were measured using a TSI Optical Particle Sizer (OPS 3330) during 15-min sessions carried out in a single-patient examination room. Using a drilling procedure as the aerosol source, the aerosol reduction performance of two types of high-volume evacuators (HVEs) and a commercial off-the-shelf air purifier was evaluated in a simulated clinical setting. Using either HVEs or the air purifier individually reduced the aerosol accumulated over the course of a 15-minutes drilling procedure at a reduction rate of 94.8 to 97.6%. Using both measures simultaneously raised the reduction rate to 99.6%. The results show that existing HVEs can effectively reduce aerosol concentration generated by a drilling procedure and can be further improved by using an air purifier. Following current regulatory guidelines can ensure a low risk of inhaling contaminated aerosol for dentists, assistants, and patients.
| S-EPMC9616072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionClinical photography in dentistry has become a vital part of dental education and clinical practice. Dental students seek demonstrations that help them visualize and understand new concepts and clinical procedures. Few multimedia resources are available that provide instruction regarding clinical photography for dental students. The concept videos serve as adjunctive teaching tools for predoctoral dental students in taking clinical photographs.MethodsI created the three concept videos on intraoral and extraoral photography by recording narrated PowerPoint slideshows. After sessions on basic photography concepts and digital camera operation, I used concept videos to show how to take comprehensive quality dental photographs in a step-by-step manner and to demonstrate positions of an operator and a patient. I collected feedback using an electronic survey sent to all 33 third-year dental students who participated.ResultsEleven students completed the survey; all students responded favorably to this method of instruction. Individual comments were also positive on helpfulness, conciseness, and applicability.DiscussionThese concept videos were shown to be a helpful resource for dental students in enhancing their knowledge and skills in obtaining dental photographs. Multimedia resources that helped provide students with practical tips and suggestions could supplement clinical chair-side teaching with faculty and further advance their knowledge and skills. Future studies could include more interactive platforms for better student utilization of the resource, and also compare students' performance before and after watching the videos.
| S-EPMC7780737 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic led to significant changes in the provision of dental services, aimed at reducing the spread of respiratory pathogens through restrictions on aerosol generating procedures (AGPs). Evaluating the risk that AGPs pose in terms of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is complex, and measuring dental aerosols is challenging. To date, few studies focus on intra-oral suction. This study sought to assess the effectiveness of commonly used intra-oral suction devices on aerosol mitigation.MethodsUltrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece procedures were undertaken to generate aerosol particles. Multiple particle sensors were positioned near the oral cavity. Sensor data were extracted using single board computers with custom in-house Bash code. Different high-volume and low-volume suction devices, both static and dynamic, were evaluated for their efficacy in preventing particle escape during procedures.ResultsIn all AGPs the use of any suction device tested resulted in a significant reduction in particle counts compared with no suction. Low-volume and static suction devices showed spikes in particle count demonstrating moments where particles were able to escape from the oral cavity. High-volume dynamic suction devices, however, consistently reduced the particle count to background levels, appearing to eliminate particle escape.ConclusionsDynamic high-volume suction devices that follow the path of the aerosol generating device effectively eliminate aerosol particles escaping from the oral cavity, in contrast to static devices which allow periodic escape of aerosol particles. Measuring the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a dental setting is multi-factorial; however, these data suggest that the appropriate choice of suction equipment may further reduce the risk from AGPs.
| S-EPMC9447970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDisease severity in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be associated with inoculation dose. This has triggered interest in intubation barrier devices to block droplet exposure; however, aerosol protection with these devices is not known. This study hypothesized that barrier devices reduce aerosol outside of the barrier.MethodsAerosol containment in closed, semiclosed, semiopen, and open barrier devices was investigated: (1) "glove box" sealed with gloves and caudal drape, (2) "drape tent" with a drape placed over a frame, (3) "slit box" with armholes and caudal end covered by vinyl slit diaphragms, (4) original "aerosol box," (5) collapsible "interlocking box," (6) "simple drape" over the patient, and (7) "no barrier." Containment was investigated by (1) vapor instillation at manikin's right arm with video-assisted visual evaluation and (2) submicrometer ammonium sulfate aerosol particles ejected through the manikin's mouth with ventilation and coughs. Samples were taken from standardized locations inside and around the barriers using a particle counter and a mass spectrometer. Aerosol evacuation from the devices was measured using standard hospital suction, a surgical smoke evacuator, and a Shop-Vac.ResultsVapor experiments demonstrated leakage via arm holes and edges. Only closed and semiclosed devices and the aerosol box reduced aerosol particle counts (median [25th, 75th percentile]) at the operator's mouth compared to no barrier (combined median 29 [-11, 56], n = 5 vs. 157 [151, 166], n = 5). The other barrier devices provided less reduction in particle counts (133 [128, 137], n = 5). Aerosol evacuation to baseline required 15 min with standard suction and the Shop-Vac and 5 min with a smoke evacuator.ConclusionsBarrier devices may reduce exposure to droplets and aerosol. With meticulous tucking, the glove box and drape tent can retain aerosol during airway management. Devices that are not fully enclosed may direct aerosol toward the laryngoscopist. Aerosol evacuation reduces aerosol content inside fully enclosed devices. Barrier devices must be used in conjunction with body-worn personal protective equipment.Editor’s perspective
| S-EPMC7687877 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the impact of various aerosol mitigation interventions and to establish duration of aerosol persistence in a variety of dental clinic configurations.MethodsWe performed aerosol measurement studies in endodontic, orthodontic, periodontic, pediatric, and general dentistry clinics. We used an optical aerosol spectrometer and wearable particulate matter sensors to measure real-time aerosol concentration from the vantage point of the dentist during routine care in a variety of clinic configurations (eg, open bay, single room, partitioned operatories). We compared the impact of aerosol mitigation strategies (eg, ventilation and high-volume evacuation (HVE), and prevalence of particulate matter) in the dental clinic environment before, during, and after high-speed drilling, slow-speed drilling, and ultrasonic scaling procedures.ResultsConical and ISOVAC HVE were superior to standard-tip evacuation for aerosol-generating procedures. When aerosols were detected in the environment, they were rapidly dispersed within minutes of completing the aerosol-generating procedure. Few aerosols were detected in dental clinics, regardless of configuration, when conical and ISOVAC HVE were used.ConclusionsDentists should consider using conical or ISOVAC HVE rather than standard-tip evacuators to reduce aerosols generated during routine clinical practice. Furthermore, when such effective aerosol mitigation strategies are employed, dentists need not leave dental chairs fallow between patients because aerosols are rapidly dispersed.
| S-EPMC10822722 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dental turbines and scalers, used every day in dental operatories, feature built-in water spray that generates considerable amounts of water aerosol. The problem is that it is not exactly known how much. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, several aerosol safety recommendations have been issued-based on little empirical evidence, as almost no data are available on the exact aerosol concentrations generated during dental treatment. Similarly, little is known about the differences in the efficacy of different commercially available aerosol control systems to reduce in-treatment aerosol load. In this in vitro study, we used spectrometry to explore these questions. The time-dependent effect of conventional airing on aerosol concentrations was also studied. Everyday patient treatment situations were modeled. The test setups were defined by the applied instrument and its spray direction (high-speed turbine with direct/indirect airspray or ultrasonic scaler with indirect airspray) and the applied aerosol control system (the conventional high-volume evacuator or a lately introduced aerosol exhaustor). Two parameters were analyzed: total number concentration in the entire measurement range of the spectrometer and total number concentration within the 60 to 384 nm range. The results suggest that instrument type and spray direction significantly influence the resulting aerosol concentrations. Aerosol generation by the ultrasonic scaler is easily controlled. As for the high-speed turbine, the efficiency of control might depend on how exactly the instrument is used during a treatment. The results suggest that scenarios where the airspray is frequently directed toward the air of the operatory are the most difficult to control. The tested control systems did not differ in their efficiency, but the study could not provide conclusive results in this respect. With conventional airing through windows with a standard fan, a safety airing period of at least 15 minutes between treatments is recommended.
| S-EPMC7861533 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of equipment such as dental handpieces and ultrasonic tips in the dental environment has potentially heightened the generation and spread of aerosols, which are dispersant particles contaminated by etiological factors. Although numerous types of personal protective equipment have been used to lower contact with contaminants, they generally do not exhibit excellent removal rates and user-friendliness in tandem. To solve this problem, we developed a prototype of an air-barrier device that forms an air curtain as well as performs suction and evaluated the effect of this newly developed device through a simulation study and experiments. The air-barrier device derived the improved design for reducing bioaerosols through the simulation results. The experiments also demonstrated that air-barrier devices are effective in reducing bioaerosols generated at a distance in a dental environment. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that air-barrier devices in dental environments can play an effective role in reducing contaminating particles.
| S-EPMC10452020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease pandemic has afforded dental professionals an opportunity to reconsider infection control during treatment. We investigated the efficacy of combining extraoral high-volume evacuators (eHVEs) with preprocedural mouth rinsing in reducing aerosol contamination by ultrasonic scalers. A double-masked, two-group, crossover randomized clinical trial was conducted over eight weeks. A total of 10 healthy subjects were divided into two groups; they received 0.5% povidone-iodine (PI), essential oil (EO), or water as preprocedural rinse. Aerosols produced during ultrasonic scaling were collected from the chest area (PC), dentist's mask, dentist's chest area (DC), bracket table, and assistant's area. Bacterial contamination was assessed using colony counting and adenosine triphosphate assays. With the eHVE 10 cm away from the mouth, bacterial contamination by aerosols was negligible. With the eHVE 20 cm away, more dental aerosols containing bacteria were detected at the DC and PC. Mouth rinsing decreased viable bacterial count by 31-38% (PI) and 22-33% (EO), compared with no rinsing. The eHVE prevents bacterial contamination when close to the patient's mouth. Preprocedural mouth rinsing can reduce bacterial contamination where the eHVE is positioned away from the mouth, depending on the procedure. Combining an eHVE with preprocedural mouth rinsing can reduce bacterial contamination in dental offices.
| S-EPMC9141298 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Objectives: The aim is to measure the influence of different intraoral (crowding and molar inclination) and extraoral (surface material and ambient light) conditions on the efficacy and efficiency of intraoral scanning. (2) Methods: In a controlled in vitro experimental study, the samples were divided into six groups showing two types of intraoral conditions-lower incisor crowding (groups 1-3) and lower molar mesial tipping (groups 4-6). Each modified model was replicated using three types of materials with different light-absorption properties (n = 18 models). Each sample was scanned 30 times at light intensities of 0.0, 1800, or 3600 l×, yielding 3240 scans. Scanning efficiency (digital acquisition; scanning chair-time; and scanning failures) and scanning efficacy (undetected volume) were assessed using virtual superimpositions and Mecano Equate software. The intra- and interobserver error and reliability of the method were calculated and data analyses were performed using the t-test, paired t-test, and one-way analysis of variance (p < 0.05). (3) Results: Digital acquisition was influenced by the degree of crowding and molar inclination (p < 0.05). The scanning surface material affected the efficacy and efficiency, which were lower with a calcium sulfate hemihydrate A modified compound scanning surface (p < 0.05). Higher intensities of ambient light in the scanning room were associated with reduced scanning efficacy (p < 0.05). Moreover, the scanner showed greater amounts of undetected volume as the degrees of crowding and mesial tipping of the lower second molar increased over 25°, with mean error values of 0.97 mm3 and 1.12 mm3, respectively. (4) Conclusions: For scanning procedures employing digital acquisition, differences in the degrees of crowding and mesial tipping of the lower second molar, scanning surface material, and external light source intensity influence the efficacy and efficiency of the scanning procedures, scanning chair-time, scanning failures, and undetected volume.
| S-EPMC7565800 | biostudies-literature