Efficacy of Aerosol Reduction Measures for Dental Aerosol Generating Procedures

Transcriptome changes in humans acutely exposed to nanoparticles during grinding of dental nanocomposites

Aim: Today, there is a lack of research studies concerning human acute exposure to nanoparticles (NPs). Our investigation aimed to simulate real-world acute inhalation exposure to NPs released during work with dental nanocomposites in a dental office or technician laboratory. Methods: Blood samples from female volunteers were processed before and after inhalation exposure. Transcriptomic mRNA and miRNA expression changes were analyzed. Results: We detected large interindividual variability, 90 significantly deregulated mRNAs, and 4 miRNAs when samples of participants before and after dental nanocomposite grinding were compared. Conclusion: The results suggest that inhaled dental NPs may present an occupational hazard to human health, as indicated by the changes in the processes related to oxidative stress, synthesis of eicosanoids, and cell division.

Aerosol-generating procedures and associated control/mitigation measures: Position paper from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association and the American Dental Hygienists' Association

Background

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, how to reduce the risk of spreading viruses and other microorganisms while performing aerosolgenerating procedures (AGPs) has become a challenging question within the dental and dental hygiene communities. The purpose of this position paper is to summarize the evidence of the effectiveness of various mitigation methods used to reduce the risk of infection transmission during AGPs in dentistry.

Methods

The authors searched 6 databases-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar-for relevant scientific evidence published between January 2012 and December 2022 to answer 6 research questions about the risk of transmission, methods, devices, and personal protective equipment (PPE) used to reduce contact with microbial pathogens and limit the spread of aerosols.

Results

A total of 78 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The literature on the risk of infection transmission including SARS-CoV-2 between dental hygienists and their patients is limited. Although several mouthrinses are effective in reducing bacterial contaminations in aerosols, their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 is also limited. The combined use of eyewear, masks, and face shields is effective in preventing contamination of the facial and nasal region while performing AGPs. High-volume evacuation with or without an intraoral suction, low-volume evacuation, saliva ejector, and rubber dam (when appropriate) have shown effectiveness in reducing aerosol transmission beyond the generation site. Finally, the appropriate combination of ventilation and filtration in dental operatories is effective in limiting the spread of aerosols.

Discussion and Conclusion

Aerosols produced during clinical procedures can pose a risk of infection transmission between dental hygienists and their patients. The implementation of practices supported by available evidence will ensure greater patient and provider safety in oral health settings. More studies in oral health clinical environments would shape future practices and protocols, ultimately to ensure the delivery of safe clinical care.

Quantitative Evaluation of Aerosols Produced in the Dental Office during Caries Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Effective removal of aerosols generated during dental treatment is crucial for maintaining biosafety in dental practice. This study aimed to measure the aerosol amount and the number of aerobic bacteria in the air during caries treatment.

METHODS

The study involved 50 molar teeth (n = 50) in the mandible in 50 patients divided into two groups based on the type of a high-volume evacuator (HVE); G1 (n = 25) conventional HVE (EM19 EVO, Monoart^® Euronda, Vicenza, Italy) and G2 (n = 25) a new, wider, customized HVE. The PC200 laser particle counter (Trotec GmbH, Schwerin, Germany) was used to measure aerosol particles in a range of 0.3-10.0 μm near the operator's mouth. The study used 60 microbiological plates with a microbiological medium (Columbia Agar with 5% Sheep Blood) to check the number of aerobic bacteria in the air.

RESULTS

The mean value of aerosol particles in the G1 group (conventional HVE) was 54,145 ± 7915, while in the G2 group (test, wider evacuator) was lower and amounted to 32,632 ± 1803. (p < 0.001). The median total bacteria count in the air per cubic meter in control, G1 (HVE), and G2 (NEW-HVE) groups were 50 [36-60]; 772 [643-881]; 120 [92-139], respectively. (p < 0.05). Gram-positive cocci were the predominant bacteria in the plates: Micrococcus sp. (50%), Bacillus species (36.4%), Staphylococcus epidermidis (3.8%), Staphylococcus saprophyticus (3.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

the application of the wider high-volume evacuator increases the air purity during caries treatment as well as the biological safety of a dental office.

Direct-reading instruments for aerosols: A review for occupational health and safety professionals part 2: Applications

Direct reading instruments (DRIs) for aerosols have been used in industrial hygiene practice for many years, but their potential has not been fully realized by many occupational health and safety professionals. Although some DRIs quantify other metrics, this article will primarily focus on DRIs that measure aerosol number, size, or mass. This review addresses three applications of aerosol DRIs that occupational health and safety professionals can use to discern, characterize, and document exposure conditions and resolve aerosol-related problems in the workplace. The most common application of aerosol DRIs is the evaluation of engineering controls. Examples are provided for many types of workplaces and situations including construction, agriculture, mining, conventional manufacturing, advanced manufacturing (nanoparticle technology and additive manufacturing), and non-industrial sites. Aerosol DRIs can help identify the effectiveness of existing controls and, as needed, develop new strategies to reduce potential aerosol exposures. Aerosol concentration mapping (ACM) using DRI data can focus attention on emission sources in the workplace spatially illustrate the effectiveness of controls and constructively convey concerns to management and workers. Examples and good practices of ACM are included. Video Exposure Monitoring (VEM) is another useful technique in which video photography is synced with the concentration output of an aerosol DRI. This combination allows the occupational health and safety professional to see what tasks, environmental situations, and/or worker actions contribute to aerosol concentration and potential exposure. VEM can help identify factors responsible for temporal variations in concentration. VEM can assist with training, engage workers, convince managers about necessary remedial actions, and provide for continuous improvement of the workplace environment. Although using DRIs for control evaluation, ACM and VEM can be time-consuming, the resulting information can provide useful data to prompt needed action by employers and employees. Other barriers to adoption include privacy and security issues in some worksites. This review seeks to provide information so occupational health and safety professionals can better understand and effectively use these powerful applications of aerosol DRIs.