Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use.
Aerosol
COVID-19
Dental clinics
Dental equipment
Dental hygienists
Dental office
Dental scaling
SARS-Cov-2
Suction
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 09 2022
06 09 2022
Historique:
received:
14
04
2022
accepted:
28
07
2022
entrez:
6
9
2022
pubmed:
7
9
2022
medline:
9
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The 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. Ultrasonic 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. In 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. Dynamic 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The 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.
METHODS
Ultrasonic 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.
RESULTS
In 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.
CONCLUSIONS
Dynamic 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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36068515
doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02386-w
pii: 10.1186/s12903-022-02386-w
pmc: PMC9447970
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
388Subventions
Organisme : Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Jun;31(6):458-62
pubmed: 15142216
J Hosp Infect. 2006 Sep;64(1):76-81
pubmed: 16820249
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 10;17(3):e0265076
pubmed: 35271682
J Dent Res. 2022 Apr;101(4):384-391
pubmed: 34757884
Br Dent J. 2020 Nov 12;:
pubmed: 33184480
Nature. 2020 Jun;582(7813):557-560
pubmed: 32340022
J Infect Public Health. 2015 May-Jun;8(3):260-5
pubmed: 25564419
Br Dent J. 2021 Jan 07;:
pubmed: 33414544
BMC Oral Health. 2021 Feb 5;21(1):52
pubmed: 33546674
J Dent Res. 2021 Jun;100(6):583-590
pubmed: 33779355
Br Dent J. 2021 Jan 8;:
pubmed: 33414542
Travel Med Infect Dis. 2020 Jul - Aug;36:101751
pubmed: 32473312
J Dent Res. 2021 Dec;100(13):1461-1467
pubmed: 34338580
Interface Focus. 2021 Oct 12;11(6):20210049
pubmed: 34956601
Eur J Dent. 2020 Dec;14(S 01):S146-S151
pubmed: 33285574
Sci Rep. 2020 Oct 14;10(1):17670
pubmed: 33051542
BDJ Open. 2022 Jan 14;8(1):2
pubmed: 35031596
J Dent. 2021 Feb;105:103565
pubmed: 33359041
Br Dent J. 2020 Nov 20;:
pubmed: 33184481
J Am Dent Assoc. 2021 Jun;152(6):455-462
pubmed: 34044977
J Oral Rehabil. 2021 Jan;48(1):61-72
pubmed: 32966633
Materials (Basel). 2020 Nov 12;13(22):
pubmed: 33198307