Aerosol concentrations and size distributions during clinical dental procedures

被引:12
|
作者
Lahdentausta, Laura [1 ,2 ]
Sanmark, Enni [3 ]
Lauretsalo, Saku [1 ,2 ]
Korkee, Verneri [1 ,2 ]
Nyman, Sini [2 ]
Atanasova, Nina [4 ,5 ]
Oksanen, Lotta [3 ]
Zhao, Jiangyue [6 ]
Hussein, Tareq [7 ,8 ]
Hyvarinen, Antti [5 ]
Paju, Susanna [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Helsinki, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Dis, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[2] Helsinki Univ Hosp, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[3] Helsinki Univ Hosp, Dept Otorhinolaryngol & Phoniatr Head & Neck Surg, FI-00029 Helsinki, Finland
[4] Univ Helsinki, Fac Biol & Environm Sci, Mol & Integrat Biosci, Helsinki, Finland
[5] Finnish Meteorol Inst, Helsinki, Finland
[6] Fraunhofer WKI, Mat Anal & Indoor Chem, Braunschweig, Germany
[7] Univ Jordan, Sch Sci, Dept Phys, Environm & Atmospher Res Lab EARL, Amman 11942, Jordan
[8] Univ Helsinki, Inst Atmospher & Earth Syst Res INAR Phys, UHEL, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
Dental aerosol; Air turbine handpiece; High-and low-speed dental handpiece; Ultrasonic scaler; Optical particle sizer;
D O I
10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11074
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: Suspected aerosol-generating dental instruments may cause risks for operators by transmitting pathogens, such as the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The aim of our study was to measure aerosol generation in various dental procedures in clinical settings.Methods: The study population comprised of 84 patients who underwent 253 different dental procedures measured with Optical Particle Sizer in a dental office setting. Aerosol particles from 0.3 to 10 mu m in diameter were measured. Dental procedures included oral examinations (N = 52), restorative procedures with air turbine handpiece (N = 8), high-speed (N = 6) and low-speed (N = 30) handpieces, ultrasonic scaling (N = 31), peri-odontal treatment using hand instruments (N = 60), endodontic treatment (N = 12), intraoral radiographs (N = 24), and dental local anesthesia (N = 31).Results: Air turbine handpieces significantly elevated <1 mu m particle median (p = 0.013) and maximum (p = 0.016) aerosol number concentrations as well as aerosol particle mass concentrations (p = 0.046 and p = 0.006) compared to the background aerosol levels preceding the operation. Low-speed dental handpieces elevated >5 mu m median (p = 0.023), maximum (p = 0.013) particle number concentrations,> 5 mu m particle mass concentrations (p = 0.021) and maximum total particle mass concentrations (p = 0.022). High-speed dental handpieces elevated aerosol concentration levels compared to the levels produced during oral examination.Conclusions: Air turbine handpieces produced the highest levels of <1 mu m aerosols and total particle number concentrations when compared to the other commonly used instruments. In addition, high-and low-speed dental handpieces and ultrasonic scalers elevated the aerosol concentration levels compared to the aerosol levels measured during oral examination. These aerosol-generating procedures, involving air turbine, high-and low -speed handpiece, and ultrasonic scaler, should be performed with caution.Clinical significance: Aerosol generating dental instruments, especially air turbine, should be used with adequate precautions (rubber dam, high-volume evacuation, FFP-respirators), because aerosols can cause a potential risk for operators and substitution of air turbine for high-speed dental handpiece in poor epidemic situations should be considered to reduce the risk of aerosol transmission.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Passive aerosol sampler for particle concentrations and size distributions
    Whitehead, Todd
    Leith, David
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING, 2008, 10 (03): : 331 - 335
  • [2] Concentrations and size distributions of aerosol particles in coastal zone
    Despiau, S
    Cougnenc, S
    Resch, F
    JOURNAL OF AEROSOL SCIENCE, 1996, 27 (03) : 403 - 415
  • [3] ELEMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS AND THEIR SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS OF BEIJING AEROSOL IN JANUARY
    王明星
    任丽新
    吕任秀
    陈建新
    曾宪周
    车建美
    AdvancesinAtmosphericSciences, 1986, (02) : 199 - 207
  • [4] AEROSOL SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS AND CONCENTRATIONS MEASURED DURING GM PROVING GROUND SULFATE STUDY
    WHITBY, KT
    KITTELSON, DB
    CANTRELL, BK
    BARSIC, NJ
    DOLAN, DF
    TARVESTAD, LD
    NIEKEN, DJ
    WOLF, JL
    WOOD, JR
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 1976, 172 (SEP3): : 32 - 32
  • [5] AGLITE: A multiwavelength lidar for aerosol size distributions, flux and concentrations
    Wilkerson, Thomas D.
    Zavyalov, Vladimir V.
    Bingham, Gail. E.
    Swasey, Jason A.
    Hancock, Jed J.
    Crowther, Blake G.
    Cornelsen, Scott S.
    Marchant, Christian
    Cutts, James N.
    Huish, David C.
    Earl, Curtis L.
    Andersen, Jan M.
    Cox, McLain L.
    LASER RADAR TECHNOLOGY AND APPLICATIONS XI, 2006, 6214
  • [6] EVALUATING SPATTER AND AEROSOL CONTAMINATION DURING DENTAL PROCEDURES
    BENTLEY, CD
    BURKHART, NW
    CRAWFORD, JJ
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION, 1994, 125 (05): : 579 - 584
  • [7] A clinical observational analysis of aerosol emissions from dental procedures
    Dudding, Tom
    Sheikh, Sadiyah
    Gregson, Florence
    Haworth, Jennifer
    Haworth, Simon
    Main, Barry G.
    Shrimpton, Andrew J.
    Hamilton, Fergus W.
    Ireland, Anthony J.
    Maskell, Nick A.
    Reid, Jonathan P.
    Bzdek, Bryan R.
    Gormley, Mark
    PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (03):
  • [8] COMPARISON OF PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS OF DENTAL WASTE-WATER UNDER VARIOUS CLINICAL PROCEDURES
    BATCHIU, H
    STONE, M
    NALEWAY, CA
    MEYER, D
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1995, 74 : 149 - 149
  • [9] Ambient aerosol size distributions and number concentrations measured during the Pittsburgh Air Quality Study (PAQS)
    Stanier, CO
    Khlystov, AY
    Pandis, SN
    ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2004, 38 (20) : 3275 - 3284
  • [10] ELEMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS AND PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS IN AN ATMOSPHERIC BACKGROUND AEROSOL
    LANNEFORS, HO
    JOHANSSON, TB
    GRANAT, L
    RUDELL, B
    NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTS & METHODS, 1977, 142 (1-2): : 105 - 110