Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2022; 16(04): 803-808
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1739448
Original Article

The Efficacy of High-Volume Evacuators and Extraoral Vacuum Aspirators in Reducing Aerosol and Droplet in Ultrasonic Scaling Procedures during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Trijani Suwandi 
1   Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Trisakti University, Grogol Jakarta Barat, Indonesia
,
Vidya Nursolihati 
1   Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Trisakti University, Grogol Jakarta Barat, Indonesia
,
Mikha Sundjojo 
1   Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Trisakti University, Grogol Jakarta Barat, Indonesia
,
Armelia Sari Widyarman 
2   Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Trisakti University, Grogol Jakarta Barat, Indonesia
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective SARS-CoV-2 can be carried by aerosols and droplets produced during dental procedures, particularly by the use of high-speed handpieces, air-water syringes, and ultrasonic scalers. High-volume evacuators (HVEs) and extraoral vacuum aspirators (EOVAs) reduce such particles. However, there is limited data on their efficacy. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of HVE and EOVA in reducing aerosols and droplets during ultrasonic scaling procedures.

Materials and Methods Three ultrasonic scaling simulations were conducted on mannequins: 1. saliva ejector (SE) was used alone (control); 2. SE was used in combination with HVE; and 3. SE was used in combination with HVE and EOVA. Paper filters were placed on the operator's and assistant's face shields and bodies, and the contamination of aerosols and droplets was measured by counting blue spots on the paper filters.

Statistical Analysis All data were analyzed for normality using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The differences between each method were analyzed using a two-way ANOVA, followed by a posthoc test. The differences were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05.

Result Using HVE and EOVA reduced aerosols and droplets better than using SE alone or SE and HVE: the posthoc test for contamination revealed a significant difference (p < 0.01). The assistant was subjected to greater contamination than the operator during all three ultrasonic scaling procedures.

Conclusion The usage of HVE and EOVA significantly reduced aerosols and droplets compared with using SE solely. Using these techniques together could prevent the transmission of airborne disease during dental cleanings, especially COVID-19. Further studies of aerosol-reducing devices are still needed to ensure the safety of dental workers and patients.

Keywords

aerosol - droplet - extraoral vacuum aspirators - high-volume evacuators - ultrasonic scaling


Publication History

Article published online:
11 January 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Ge ZY, Yang LM, Xia JJ, Fu XH, Zhang YZ. Possible aerosol transmission of COVID-19 and special precautions in dentistry. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2020; 21 (05) 361-368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Raman R, Patel KJ, Ranjan K. COVID-19: unmasking emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants, vaccines and therapeutic strategies. Biomolecules 2021; 11 (07) 993 DOI: 10.3390/biom11070993.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Variant D. What We Know About the Science. Accessed August 29, 2021 at: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: implications for infection prevention precautions. Accessed: August 29, 2021 at: https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/transmission-of-sars-cov-2-implications-for-infection-prevention-precautions
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Farook FF, Mohamed Nuzaim MN, Taha Ababneh K, Alshammari A, Alkadi L. COVID-19 pandemic: oral health challenges and recommendations. Eur J Dent 2020; 14 (S 01): S165-S170
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Johnson IG, Jones RJ, Gallagher JE. et al. Dental periodontal procedures: a systematic review of contamination (splatter, droplets and aerosol) in relation to COVID-19. BDJ Open 2021; 7 (01) 15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ram K, Thakur RC, Singh DK. et al. Why airborne transmission hasn't been conclusive in case of COVID-19? An atmospheric science perspective. Sci Total Environ 2021; 773: 145525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Bazant MZ, Bush JWM. A guideline to limit indoor airborne transmission of COVID-19. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2021; 118 (17) e2018995118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lloro V, Giovannoni ML, Luaces VL, Manzanares MC. Perioral aerosol sequestration suction device effectively reduces biological cross-contamination in dental procedures. Eur J Dent 2021; 15 (02) 340-346
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Harrel SK, Barnes JB, Rivera-Hidalgo F. Aerosol and splatter contamination from the operative site during ultrasonic scaling. J Am Dent Assoc 1998; 129 (09) 1241-1249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Peng X, Xu X, Li Y, Cheng L, Zhou X, Ren B. Transmission routes of 2019-nCoV and controls in dental practice. Int J Oral Sci 2020; 12 (01) 9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Morbidity and mortality weekly report (MMWR): Recommended infection-control practices for dentistry. Accessed October 19, 2020 at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/rr/rr4208.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Motegi N, Ikegami Y, Chiba M, Asano Y. The effect of extra-oral suction on aerosol reduction. Dent Outlook 2010; 115 (06) 1-18
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Veena HR, Mahantesha S, Joseph PA, Patil SR, Patil SH. Dissemination of aerosol and splatter during ultrasonic scaling: a pilot study. J Infect Public Health 2015; 8 (03) 260-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Harrel SK, Molinari J. Aerosols and splatter in dentistry: a brief review of the literature and infection control implications. J Am Dent Assoc 2004; 135 (04) 429-437
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Lotfi M, Hamblin MR, Rezaei N. COVID-19: Transmission, prevention, and potential therapeutic opportunities. Clin Chim Acta 2020; 508: 254-266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Rajeev K, Kuthiala P, Ahmad FN. et al. Review article aerosol suction device: mandatory armamentarium in dentistry post lock down. J Adv Med Dent Sci Res. 2020; 8 (04) 81-83
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Shahdad S, Patel T, Hindocha A. et al. The efficacy of an extraoral scavenging device on reduction of splatter contamination during dental aerosol generating procedures: an exploratory study [published correction appears in Br Dent J. 2020 Oct 13]. Br Dent J 2020; 1-10 DOI: 10.1038/s41415-020-2112-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Teanpaisan R, Taeporamaysamai M, Rattanachone P, Poldoung N, Srisintorn S. The usefulness of the modified extra-oral vacuum aspirator (EOVA) from household vacuum cleaner in reducing bacteria in dental aerosols. Int Dent J 2001; 51 (06) 413-416
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Chavis SE, Hines SE, Dyalram D, Wilken NC, Dalby RN. Can extraoral suction units minimize droplet spatter during a simulated dental procedure?. J Am Dent Assoc 2021; 152 (02) 157-165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Ou Q, Placucci RG, Danielson J. et al. Characterization and mitigation of aerosols and spatters from ultrasonic scalers. J Am Dent Assoc 2021; 152 (12) 981-990
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Allison JR, Currie CC, Edwards DC. et al. Evaluating aerosol and splatter following dental procedures: Addressing new challenges for oral health care and rehabilitation. J Oral Rehabil 2021; 48 (01) 61-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Matys J, Grzech-Leśniak K. Dental aerosol as a hazard risk for dental workers. Materials (Basel) 2020; 13 (22) 5109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Zhao B, An N, Chen C. Using an air purifier as a supplementary protective measure in dental clinics during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2021; 42 (04) 493
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Cumbo E, Gallina G, Messina P, Scardina GA. Alternative methods of sterilization in dental practices against COVID-19. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020; 17 (16) 5736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Al-Benna S. Negative pressure rooms and COVID-19. J Perioper Pract 2021; 31 (1-2): 18-23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kumar PS, Geisinger ML, Avila-Ortiz G. Methods to mitigate infection spread from aerosol-generating dental procedures. J Periodontol 2021; 92 (06) 784-792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar