Literature DB >> 32978530

Evidence-based strategies to reduce contamination from aerosolised microbes in dental practice environment.

K Ali1, M Raja2.   

Abstract

Cohort selection The aim was to evaluate interventions to minimise microbial contamination from aerosol generating procedures in the dental office. Seven electronic databases were searched using key words such as 'aerosols', 'droplets', 'spatter', 'microbial loads' etc to identify relevant randomised controlled trials and prospective non-randomised clinical trials until 6 April 2020.Data sources PubMed; Scopus; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Open Grey; ClinicalTrials.gov; National Research Register; and hand searches.Data analysis Eligible studies were analysed for effectiveness of various interventions on the microbial counts in the aerosols generated in the dental office using predefined criteria. Data were analysed for assessment of quality of evidence and confidence in the estimated effect, risk of bias and other analyses using Stata 15.1 software. PRISMA guidelines extension for network meta-analysis were followed for reporting.Results Initial search identified 266 studies, of which 35 were evaluated for full text. Finally, 29 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria for qualitative synthesis. The majority of the included studies were published in the last decade, and 21 out of the 29 studies were randomised controlled trials. However, based on comparable procedural settings (study design, study populations, interventions and outcome measures), only 11 were eligible for contribution to the network meta-analysis. The setting of all interventions was ultrasonic scaling of adult patients in a clinical dental practice environment, and involved 16 direct and 29 indirect comparisons. A multivariate meta-analysis showed pre-procedural mouth rinse with tempered chlorhexidine 0.2% at 47°C was most effective in reducing post-procedural bacterial load compared to the control. A mean difference of -0.92 (95% CI -15.4 to -0.29) in log10 colony-forming units was observed in air samples within 90 cm of the dental unit.Conclusions Notwithstanding the limitations of this network meta-analysis, pre-procedural mouth rinse with tempered chlorhexidine appears to be most effective in reducing bacterial counts in aerosols generated during dental operative procedures. Further randomised controlled clinical trials based on robust designs are required to establish the effectiveness of antimicrobial agents in reducing aerosol-related microbial loads (bacteria and viruses) in clinical environments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32978530      PMCID: PMC7517050          DOI: 10.1038/s41432-020-0108-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evid Based Dent        ISSN: 1462-0049


  9 in total

1.  Guideline for testing chemical disinfectants regarding their virucidal activity within the field of human medicine : as of December 1st, 2014 Prepared by the German Association for the Control of Virus Diseases (DVV) and the Robert Koch Institute (RKI).

Authors:  Holger F Rabenau; Ingeborg Schwebke; Johannes Blümel; Maren Eggers; Dieter Glebe; Ingrid Rapp; Andreas Sauerbrei; Eike Steinmann; Jochen Steinmann; Hannelore Willkommen; Peter Wutzler
Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 1.513

Review 2.  Chlorhexidine and hypersensitivity reactions in dentistry.

Authors:  M N Pemberton; J Gibson
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.626

Review 3.  Transmission routes of 2019-nCoV and controls in dental practice.

Authors:  Xian Peng; Xin Xu; Yuqing Li; Lei Cheng; Xuedong Zhou; Biao Ren
Journal:  Int J Oral Sci       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 6.344

4.  Beware of the second wave of COVID-19.

Authors:  Shunqing Xu; Yuanyuan Li
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-04-08       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Coronavirus COVID-19 impacts to dentistry and potential salivary diagnosis.

Authors:  Robinson Sabino-Silva; Ana Carolina Gomes Jardim; Walter L Siqueira
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Efficacy of Povidone-Iodine Nasal and Oral Antiseptic Preparations Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Authors:  Jesse S Pelletier; Belachew Tessema; Samantha Frank; Jonna B Westover; Seth M Brown; Joseph A Capriotti
Journal:  Ear Nose Throat J       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 1.697

7.  Quantitative proteomic analysis of gingival crevicular fluid in different periodontal conditions.

Authors:  Carina M Silva-Boghossian; Ana Paula V Colombo; Marcia Tanaka; Carolina Rayo; Yizhi Xiao; Walter L Siqueira
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019.

Authors:  Na Zhu; Dingyu Zhang; Wenling Wang; Xingwang Li; Bo Yang; Jingdong Song; Xiang Zhao; Baoying Huang; Weifeng Shi; Roujian Lu; Peihua Niu; Faxian Zhan; Xuejun Ma; Dayan Wang; Wenbo Xu; Guizhen Wu; George F Gao; Wenjie Tan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  Topical preparations to reduce SARS-CoV-2 aerosolization in head and neck mucosal surgery.

Authors:  Harman S Parhar; Kendall Tasche; Robert M Brody; Gregory S Weinstein; Bert W O'Malley; Rabie M Shanti; Jason G Newman
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2020-04-25       Impact factor: 3.147

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.