Cargando…

Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Piela, Krystyna, Watson, Paddy, Donnelly, Reuben, Goulding, Marilyn, Henriquez, Fiona L., MacKay, William, Culshaw, Shauna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9447970/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36068515
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-022-02386-w
_version_ 1784783969214005248
author Piela, Krystyna
Watson, Paddy
Donnelly, Reuben
Goulding, Marilyn
Henriquez, Fiona L.
MacKay, William
Culshaw, Shauna
author_facet Piela, Krystyna
Watson, Paddy
Donnelly, Reuben
Goulding, Marilyn
Henriquez, Fiona L.
MacKay, William
Culshaw, Shauna
author_sort Piela, Krystyna
collection PubMed
description 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-022-02386-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9447970
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94479702022-09-06 Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use Piela, Krystyna Watson, Paddy Donnelly, Reuben Goulding, Marilyn Henriquez, Fiona L. MacKay, William Culshaw, Shauna BMC Oral Health Research 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-022-02386-w. BioMed Central 2022-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9447970/ /pubmed/36068515 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-022-02386-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Piela, Krystyna
Watson, Paddy
Donnelly, Reuben
Goulding, Marilyn
Henriquez, Fiona L.
MacKay, William
Culshaw, Shauna
Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use
title Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use
title_full Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use
title_fullStr Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use
title_full_unstemmed Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use
title_short Aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use
title_sort aerosol reduction efficacy of different intra-oral suction devices during ultrasonic scaling and high-speed handpiece use
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9447970/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36068515
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-022-02386-w
work_keys_str_mv AT pielakrystyna aerosolreductionefficacyofdifferentintraoralsuctiondevicesduringultrasonicscalingandhighspeedhandpieceuse
AT watsonpaddy aerosolreductionefficacyofdifferentintraoralsuctiondevicesduringultrasonicscalingandhighspeedhandpieceuse
AT donnellyreuben aerosolreductionefficacyofdifferentintraoralsuctiondevicesduringultrasonicscalingandhighspeedhandpieceuse
AT gouldingmarilyn aerosolreductionefficacyofdifferentintraoralsuctiondevicesduringultrasonicscalingandhighspeedhandpieceuse
AT henriquezfional aerosolreductionefficacyofdifferentintraoralsuctiondevicesduringultrasonicscalingandhighspeedhandpieceuse
AT mackaywilliam aerosolreductionefficacyofdifferentintraoralsuctiondevicesduringultrasonicscalingandhighspeedhandpieceuse
AT culshawshauna aerosolreductionefficacyofdifferentintraoralsuctiondevicesduringultrasonicscalingandhighspeedhandpieceuse