Aerosol and spatter mitigation in dentistry: Analysis of the effectiveness of 13 setups.

OBJECTIVES: The current study aims to investigate the aerosol and spatter mitigation quality of 13 dry-field isolation methods in a simulated setup that replicates real-life work scenarios encountered in dental practices. METHODS: A crown preparation on a manikin was performed on tooth number 30 and repeated five times for each setup to simulate a patient under care. Aerosol, environmental, and operator face shield spatter, and sound intensity was measured. Generalized linear mixed models were used, and posthoc pairwise comparisons were performed to compare least-squares means when appropriate using a Tukey adjustment. RESULTS: All tested setups showed some environmental spatter formation; however, these were able to control most (and in some cases all) spatter on the operator face shield. All methods resulted in excellent aerosol mitigation when a second line of high-volume evacuation (HVE) was added to the device setup. However, in most setups, total sound levels exceeded 85 dB, posing a concern for prolonged noise exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The Prototype device and four other tested setups with secondary HVE addition completely eliminated aerosol creation as tested. Spatter of the Face Shield was best eliminated using the Prototype device. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the dental community has at its disposal equipment that can effectively mitigate aerosol and spatter.

Effectiveness of interventions to reduce aerosol generation in dental environments: A systematic review.

Certain dental procedures produce high levels of aerosols containing pathogenic microorganisms, posing a risk for the transmission of infections in dental settings. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of various aerosol mitigation interventions during clinical dental procedures in real-world environments. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase for English studies up to March 2023 according to the PRISMA guidelines. Only peer-reviewed controlled clinical trials (CCT) or randomized controlled trials (RCT) studies involving human subjects were included. The risk of bias of selected researches were evaluated by two independent authors using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. The literature search yielded 3491 articles, of which 42 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Most studies evaluated bacterial contamination in bio-aerosols, while the viral and fungal contamination was assessed in only three studies. Overall, various approaches have been applied in reducing aerosol contamination in clinical scenarios, including high-volume evacuators (HVE), mouse rinses and rubber dams, air cleaning systems, and high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters. The available evidence suggests that various aerosol mitigation strategies could be implemented to decrease the risk of cross-infection during clinical dental procedures in real-world environments. However, further clinical trials are necessary to establish statistical validity in measuring aerosol contamination and mitigation, as well as to evaluate the risk of infection transmission for viral and fungal contamination.