Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33251028›Full record

ArticleBDJ open2020

A systematic review of contamination (aerosol, splatter and droplet generation) associated with oral surgery and its relevance to COVID-19.

Jennifer E Gallagher, Sukriti K C, Ilona G Johnson, Waraf Al-Yaseen, Rhiannon Jones, Scott McGregor, Mark Robertson, Rebecca Harris, Nicola Innes, William G Wade

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BDJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. COVID-19 in Dental Practice Is Prevented by Eugenol Responsible for the Ambient Odor Specific to Dental Offices: Possibility and Speculation.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. State of the Oral Implantology Practice in Spain during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. One year of COVID-19 pandemic: Health care workers' infection rates and economical burden in medical facilities for oral and maxillofacial surgery.Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer E GallagherFaculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, King's College London, Denmark Hill Campus, Bessemer Road, London, SE5 9RS UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5068-8008
Sukriti K CFaculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Surgery, King's College London, Centre for Host Microbiome Interactions, Denmark Hill Campus, Bessemer Road, London, SE5 9RS UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3525-3908
Ilona G JohnsonCardiff University School of Dentistry, Dental Public Health, Applied Clinical Research and Public Health, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XY UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9712-2693
Waraf Al-YaseenSchool of Dentistry, Child Dental and Oral Health, University of Dundee, 2 Park Place, Dundee, DD1 4HR UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7071-5074
Rhiannon JonesCollege of Biomedical and Life Sciences, School of Dentistry, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XY UK.
Scott McGregorLibrary and Learning Centre, University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 4HR UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0457-5368
Mark RobertsonSchool of Dentistry, Child Dental and Oral Health, University of Dundee, 2 Park Place, Dundee, DD1 4HR UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0005-3044
Rebecca HarrisDepartment of Public Health, Policy & Systems, University of Liverpool, Room 124, 1st Floor, Block B, Waterhouse Building, 1-5 Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GL UK.
Nicola InnesCollege of Biomedical and Life Sciences, School of Dentistry, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XY UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9984-0012
William G WadeKing's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2685-826X
King's College London · GBUniversity of Dundee · GBCardiff University · GBPublic Health Wales · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe current COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has impacted the delivery of dental care globally and has led to re-evaluation of infection control standards. However, lack of clarity around what is known and unknown regarding droplet and aerosol generation in dentistry (including oral surgery and extractions), and their relative risk to patients and the dental team, necessitates a review of evidence relating to specific dental procedures. This review is part of a wider body of research exploring the evidence on bioaerosols in dentistry and involves detailed consideration of the risk of contamination in relation to oral surgery.

methodsA comprehensive search of Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS and ClinicalTrials.Gov was conducted using key terms and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) words relating to the review questions. Methodological quality including sensitivity was assessed using a schema developed to measure quality aspects of studies using a traffic light system to allow inter- and intra-study overview and comparison. A narrative synthesis was conducted for assessment of the included studies and for the synthesis of results.

resultsEleven studies on oral surgery (including extractions) were included in the review. They explored microbiological (bacterial and fungal) and blood (visible and/or imperceptible) contamination at the person level (patients, operators and assistants) and/or at a wider environmental level, using settle plates, chemiluminescence reagents or air samplers; all within 1 m of the surgical site. Studies were of generally low to medium quality and highlighted an overall risk of contaminated aerosol, droplet and splatter generation during oral surgery procedures, most notably during removal of impacted teeth using rotatory handpieces. Risk of contamination and spread was increased by factors, including proximity to the operatory site, longer duration of treatment, higher procedural complexity, non-use of an extraoral evacuator and areas involving more frequent contact during treatment.

conclusionA risk of contamination (microbiological, visible and imperceptible blood) to patients, dental team members and the clinical environment is present during oral surgery procedures, including routine extractions. However, the extent of contamination has not been explored fully in relation to time and distance. Variability across studies with regards to the analysis methods used and outcome measures makes it difficult to draw robust conclusions. Further studies with improved methodologies, including higher test sensitivity and consideration of viruses, are required to validate these findings.

Indexed as

Infection control in dentistryOral diseases

Identifiers

PMID33251028
PMCPMC7684564
OpenAlexW3109187871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.