SynthesisBMC oral health2024
Concern about the risk of aerosol contamination from ultrasonic scaler: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of occupational exposure to airborne particles and bioaerosols in dental clinics.Annals of work exposures and health · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Mitigating aerosol contamination: strategies for contamination-free scaling.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany instruments used in dentistry are rotary, such as handpieces, water syringes, and ultrasonic scalers that produce aerosols. The spray created by these instruments can carry, in addition to water, droplets of saliva, blood, and microorganisms, which can pose a risk of infections for healthcare professionals and patients. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this gained attention.
objectiveThe aim was to carry out a systematic review of the evidence of the scope of the aerosol produced by ultrasonic scaler in environmental contamination and the influence of the use of intraoral suction reduction devices.
designScientific literature was searched until June 19, 2021 in 6 databases: Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of science, Scopus, Virtual Health Library and Cochrane Library, without restrictions on language or publication date. Studies that evaluated the range of the aerosol produced by ultrasonic scaler during scaling/prophylaxis and the control of environmental contamination generated by it with the use of low (LVE) and high (HVE) volume evacuation systems were included.
resultsOf the 1893 potentially relevant articles, 5 of which were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The meta-analysis of 3 RCTs showed that, even at different distances from the patient's oral cavity, there was a significant increase in airborne bacteria in the dental environment with the use of ultrasonic scaler. In contrast, when meta-analysis compared the use of HVE with LVE, there was no significant difference (P = 0.40/CI -0.71[-2.37, 0.95]) for aerosol produced in the environment.
conclusionsThere is an increase in the concentration of bioaerosol in the dental environment during the use of ultrasonic scaler in scaling/prophylaxis, reaching up to 2 m away from the patient's mouth and the use of LVE, HVE or a combination of different devices, can be effective in reducing air contamination in the dental environment, with no important difference between different types of suction devices.
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.