ReviewJDR clinical and translational research2021
The Debate: What Are Aerosol-Generating Procedures in Dentistry? A Rapid Review.
Review in JDR clinical and translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- One-year clinical and radiographic evaluation of young permanent molars treated with brix 3000 vs. papacárie duo: a randomized controlled clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Access to oral healthcare for children during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study in the Aegean region of Türkiye.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Treatment Behaviors of Patients With Odontogenic Infections During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Cureus · 2025Article
- Future-Proofing Dentistry: A Qualitative Exploration of COVID-19 Responses in UK Dental Schools.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2025Article
- Dental Surgical Activity in Hospitals during COVID-19: A Nationwide Observational Cohort Study.JDR clinical and translational research · 2024Observational
- Aerosol-generating procedures and associated control/mitigation measures: Position paper from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association and the American Dental Hygienists' Association.Canadian journal of dental hygiene : CJDH = Journal canadien de l'hygiene dentaire : JCHD · 2024Review
- High-volume evacuation mitigates viral aerosol spread in dental procedures.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Evaluation of aerosols in a simulated orthodontic debanding procedure.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Microbial Air Contamination in a Dental Setting Environment and Ultrasonic Scaling in Periodontally Healthy Subjects: An Observational Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Observational
- Challenges and Opportunities for Dental Education from COVID-19.Dentistry journal · 2022Review
- Article
- Local Exhaust Ventilation to Control Dental Aerosols and Droplets.Journal of dental research · 2022Article
- Particle Size Analysis in Aerosol-Generating Dental Procedures Using Laser Diffraction Technique.Frontiers in oral health · 2022Article
- The Efficacy of an Extraoral Suction Apparatus on Reduction of Splatter Contamination during Impacted Lower Third Molar Surgical Procedure: An Observational Study.Contemporary clinical dentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis article aims to review the current national and international dental guidance produced during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic to identify the level of consensus on aerosol-generating dental procedures (AGDPs). The outcomes intend to encourage increased collaboration with respect to dental guidelines in relation to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, as well as to improve decision making and safety for dental patients and staff.
methodsThis rapid review was conducted by 2 authors (MKV and KD), with the support of a third author (SD), to assess current guidelines related to dental AGDPs. This streamlined review approach allowed synthesis of data in an efficient manner in the rapidly evolving environment associated with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.
resultsThe findings identified 1) a lack of consistency in reporting which procedures were deemed an AGDP; 2) that high-speed handpieces, air-water syringes, and mechanical scalers were consistently considered high-risk AGDPs; 3) a lack of consensus on the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission with the use of slow-speed handpieces; 4) a general agreement, when described, that rubber dam and high-volume evacuation can significantly reduce aerosol production; and 5) a lack of consistency in reporting whether procedures constitute a low, moderate, or high risk of COVID-19 transmission. The findings are discussed in relation to the guidance and future recommendations.
conclusionIt is recommended that future published guidance should indicate the risk stratification (low/moderate/high) of each procedure/exposure in a standardized international approach. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: The results of this rapid review can be used by clinicians to increase their awareness of international guidance on aerosol-generating procedures in dentistry. It will also encourage those publishing future guidance to provide an internationally standardized, risk-stratified approach to describing aerosol-generating procedures. Currently, it allows clinicians to consider aerosol-generating procedures as a risk spectrum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.