ArticleOral health & preventive dentistry2025
Evaluation of Safety of Disposable Saliva Ejectors after Autoclaving Sterilisation.
Article in Oral health & preventive dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify the bacteria and proteins that remain after cleaning and sterilisation of SEs used in dental practices, and to investigate potential problems when reusing SEs. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn total, 105 SEs used on study participants were collected. The collected SEs were immediately immersed in the disinfectant solution and then washed with tap water and a cleaning brush. The SEs were dried, placed in sterile pouches, and sterilised in an autoclave before being used in the experiment. To detect residual bacteria, SE samples were cultured in brain heart infusion (BHI) broth for 10 days, followed by re-culturing on blood agar and BHI agar. Bacterial identification was performed using bacterial colonies. To identify residual proteins, SE samples were stained with phloxine B, and the stained sites and area were analysed.
resultsResidual bacteria were found in one (1.64%) of 61 sterilised SEs. The cultured colonies were identified as Staphylococcus warneri. Residual proteins were observed on the tips of 36 (81.8%) of the 44 SE samples, and on the bodies of all samples (100%). The average stained area of the residual proteins on the SE bodies was 1.78% (standard deviation, 3.1%).
conclusionThe presence of bacteria and proteins in sterilised SEs indicates that their reuse can cause cross-contamination. This study is the first attempt to provide experimental evidence of the problems with reuse of SEs.
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.