Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34446842›Full record

ArticleBritish dental journal2021

Fallow time determination in dentistry using aerosol measurement in mechanically and non-mechanically ventilated environments.

Shakeel Shahdad, Annika Hindocha, Tulsi Patel, Neil Cagney, Jens-Dominik Mueller, Amine Koched, Noha Seoudi, Claire Morgan, Padhraig S Fleming, Ahmed Riaz Din

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British dental journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Shakeel ShahdadHonorary Clinical Professor in Oral Rehabilitation & Implantology and Consultant in Restorative Dentistry, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Dental Hospital, London, UK. shakeel.shahdad@nhs.net.
Annika HindochaDental Core Trainee, Restorative Dentistry and General Duties, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Dental Hospital, London, UK.
Tulsi PatelDental Core Trainee, Restorative Dentistry and General Duties, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Dental Hospital, London, UK.
Neil CagneyLecturer, School of Engineering and Materials Science, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Road, London, E1 4NS, UK.
Jens-Dominik MuellerReader in Computational Fluid Dynamics and Optimisation, School of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Road, London, E1 4NS, UK.
Amine KochedResearch and Analytical Application Specialist, TSI Inc, USA.
Noha SeoudiSenior Clinical Lecturer in Oral Microbiology, Centre for Oral Immunobiology and Regenerative Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, E1 2AD, UK.
Claire MorganConsultant in Restorative Dentistry, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Dental Hospital, London, UK.
Padhraig S FlemingProfessor in Orthodontics and Consultant in Orthodontics, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Dental Hospital, London, UK.
Ahmed Riaz DinPost-CCST Speciality Registrar in Orthodontics, Barts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Dental Hospital, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim To calculate fallow time (FT) required following dental aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) in both a dental hospital (mechanically ventilated) and primary care (non-mechanically ventilated). Secondary outcomes were to identify spread and persistence of aerosol in open clinics compared to closed surgeries (mechanically ventilated environment), and identify if extraoral scavenging (EOS) reduces FT and production of aerosol.Methods In vitro simulation of fast handpiece cavity preparations using a manikin was conducted in a mechanically and non-mechanically ventilated environment using Optical Particle Sizer and NanoScan at baseline, during the procedure and fallow period.Results AGPs carried out in the non-mechanically, non-ventilated environment failed to achieve baseline particle levels after one hour. In contrast, when windows were opened after AGPs, there was an immediate reduction in all particle sizes. In mechanically ventilated environments, the baseline levels of particles were very low and particle count returned to baseline within ten minutes following the AGP. There was no detectable difference between particles in mechanically ventilated open bays and closed surgeries. The effect of the EOS on reducing the particle count was greater in the non-mechanically ventilated environment; additionally, it also reduced the spikes in particle counts in mechanically ventilated environments.Conclusion High-efficiency particulate, air-filtered mechanical ventilation, along with mitigation (high-volume suction), resulted in reduction of fallow time (ten minutes). Non-ventilated rooms failed to reach baseline level even after one hour of fallow time. There was no difference in particle counts in open bays or closed surgeries in mechanically ventilated settings with an extraoral suction device reducing particulate spikes. This study confirms that AGPs are not recommended in dental surgeries where no ventilation is possible.

Identifiers

PMID34446842
PMCPMC8390043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.