Literature DB >> 3519908

Noise level evaluation of dental handpieces.

H J Mueller, Z I Sabri, A J Suchak, S McGill, J W Stanford.   

Abstract

We evaluated the noise level of fourteen air-driven handpieces, six low speed (less than 20,000 rev/min) and eight high speed (greater than 160,000 rev/min), with respect to a three-directional co-ordinate system and distances of 6, 12 and 18 in. in each chosen direction. A two-way analysis of variance of the noise level between handpieces and positions indicates that large significant differences exist amongst handpieces and in different positions, and that interaction is just barely significant. The ranking and least significant differences for the mean of all handpieces v. position and for the mean of all positions v. handpiece were compared with the results for the ranking and significances from the one-way ANOVAS for each handpiece v. position and for each position v. handpiece. A trend exists with some of the handpieces of straight design (all low speed) for increased noise levels in a direction perpendicular to the handpieces and decreased levels in a direction parallel to the handpieces. For handpieces of angled design (all high speed) both directions parallel and perpendicular (the perpendicular to the longitudinal turbine axis) to the rotor axis indicate increased noise levels. The parallel direction includes the exiting air from the exhaust port. The perpendicular direction can be indicative of an aerodynamic factor associated with the established air flow patterns. The extremes in noise level were 56.8 dBA for a low-speed handpiece of straight design at the 18 in. distance in a direction parallel to the handpiece, and 87.3 dBA for a high speed handpiece at the 6 in. distance in a perpendicular direction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3519908     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1986.tb00660.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Rehabil        ISSN: 0305-182X            Impact factor:   3.837


  7 in total

1.  Noise levels encountered in university dental clinics during different specialty treatments.

Authors:  Mohammad Abdul Baseer; Abdulrahman Al Saffan; Shahad Mousa AlMasoud; Wed Talal Dahy; Hadeel Waleed Aldali; Alaa M Walid Bachat; Rama M Walid Bachat; Osamah Mohammed AlMugeiren
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2021-08-27

2.  Noise levels of dental equipment used in dental college of Damascus University.

Authors:  Mhd Loutify Qsaibati; Ousama Ibrahim
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2014-11

3.  Prevalence of tinnitus and noise-induced hearing loss in dentists.

Authors:  Jamie Myers; Andrew B John; Suzanne Kimball; Terry Fruits
Journal:  Noise Health       Date:  2016 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 0.867

4.  Noise Disturbance and Potential Hearing Loss Due to Exposure of Dental Equipment in Flemish Dentists.

Authors:  Michael Dierickx; Suzanne Verschraegen; Els Wierinck; Guy Willems; Astrid van Wieringen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Noise exposure assessment in a dental school.

Authors:  Thitiworn Choosong; Wandee Kaimook; Ratchada Tantisarasart; Puwanai Sooksamear; Satith Chayaphum; Chanon Kongkamol; Wisarut Srisintorn; Pitchaya Phakthongsuk
Journal:  Saf Health Work       Date:  2011-12-05

6.  Hearing assessment in dental practitioners and other academic professionals from an urban setting.

Authors:  Brita Willershausen; Angelika Callaway; Thomas G Wolf; Vicky Ehlers; Lukas Scholz; Dominik Wolf; Stephan Letzel
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2014-01-18       Impact factor: 2.151

7.  The effect of noise exposure on the vestibular systems of dental technicians.

Authors:  Safa Alqudah
Journal:  Noise Health       Date:  2019 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 0.867

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.