ArticleInternational dental journal2025
Extra Positive Air Pressure to Prevent Microbial Contamination in Dental Handpieces: An Experimental Study.
Article in International dental journal, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to evaluate the effect of applying extra positive air pressure (AP) in dental handpieces (HPs) on preventing external bacterial penetration. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo investigate the suck-back phenomenon during HP operation, we examined the correlation between AP variations and the occurrence of suck-back under controlled conditions. To assess the suck-back phenomenon during HP operation, AP changes were evaluated by monitoring water displacement using a glass tube or a manometer. An extra AP supplier (EAPS) was connected to the exhaust airlines of the HP and operated for 5 seconds to control AP. To evaluate whether AP control could prevent bacterial penetration into the HP, bioburden tests were conducted by immersing the HP in five bacterial cultures during operation. This allowed for the assessment of microbial contamination risk under different AP-controlled conditions.
resultsThe manometer measurements revealed a maximum negative AP of -2.11 kPa immediately after HP operation and gradually decreased over the next 9 seconds. However, no negative AP was observed when the EAPS was activated after the HP operation. Bacteria were detected on the internal HP components when extra positive AP was not sufficiently applied following the HP operation.
conclusionIf sufficient extra positive AP is not applied after HP operation, bacteria can penetrate the HP, posing a risk of microbial contamination. However, applying extra positive AP of at least 0.1 MPa to the exhaust airflow for a minimum of 5 seconds effectively prevents microbial contamination.
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.