ArticleClinical oral investigations2023
Efficiency of HEPA-filtered extra-oral suction unit on aerosols during prosthetic dental preparation: A pilot study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of a suction device for containment of pathogenic aerosols and droplets.PloS one · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of interventions to reduce aerosol generation in dental environments: A systematic review.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAerosols formed during dental treatments have a huge risk for the spread of bacteria and viruses. This study is aimed at determining which part of the working area and at what size aerosol is formed and ensuring more effective use of HEPA-filtered devices. MATERIALS AND
methodsAnterior tooth preparation was performed by one dentist with one patient. Particle measurements were made using an airborne particle counter and were taken at four different locations: the chest of the patient, the chest of the dentist, the center of the room, and near the window. Three groups were determined for this study: group 1: measurement in a 24-h ventilated room (before the tooth preparation, empty room), group 2: measurement with the use of saliva ejector (SE), and group 3: measurement with the use of saliva ejector and HEPA-filtered extra-oral suction (HEOS) unit.
resultsThe particles generated during tooth preparation were separated according to their sizes; the concentration in different locations of the room and the efficiency of the HEOS unit were examined.
conclusionsThe present study showed that as the particle size increases, the rate of spread away from the dentist's working area decreases. The HEPA-filtered extra-oral suction unit is more effective on particles smaller than 0.5 microns. Therefore, infection control methods should be arranged according to these results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The effective and accurate use of HEPA-filtered devices in clinics significantly reduces the spread of bacterial and viral infections and cross-infection.
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.