ArticleBuilding and environment2021
How the high-volume evacuation alters the flow-field and particle removal characteristics in the mock-up dental clinic.
Article in Building and environment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Micro- and Nanoplastics in Dentistry: Challenges in Obtaining High-Quality Evidence.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Aerosol Dispersion and Efficacy of Protective Strategies During Dental Procedures.International dental journal · 2025Article
- Visualization of airborne droplets generated with dental handpieces and verification of the efficacy of high-volume evacuators: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Characterization of dental dust particles and their pathogenicity to respiratory system: a narrative review.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Review
- Comparative Dissemination of Aerosol and Splatter Using Suction Device during Ultrasonic Scaling: A Pilot Study.Dentistry journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The exposure risk of droplets and aerosols emitted from the oral cavity to the dental professionals and patients has received more attention especially the ongoing outbreak of COVID-19. The aim of this study is to address the question about how the use of the high-volume evacuation (HVE) alters the risk profiles compared with the situation only personal protective equipment (PPE). The risk profiles of the different situations were analyzed in terms of droplet velocity, flow field characteristics, and particle removal efficiency. The ultrasonic scaling with suction was performed in the mock-up experimental dental clinic, and the instantaneous moment when the HVE acted on the droplets was visualized using a laser light scattering technique. From the results of the velocity profiles, the hypothesis about the moderate effect of the HVE on high-velocity small droplets near the mannequin's mouth had been firstly proven in this study. The suction can be characterized as low-threshold equipment to bring substantial benefits to reduce the area of the contaminated region. Once the cooperation of suction, the pair of vortexes that were in the face shield area of the dental professional would be eliminated, removing the high-level contaminated region near the breathing area of dental professionals. Compared with the low and medium volume evacuation, the particle removal efficiency of the HVE was more stable at 60%. The research will provide references to the HVE recommendation in the dentistry clinical practice guidelines.
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.