imprint:
Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2022
Published in:Clinical Oral Investigations
Language:
English
DOI:
10.1007/s00784-022-04385-1
ISSN:
1436-3771
Origination:
Footnote:
Description:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Objectives</jats:title>
<jats:p>Dental treatments are inherently associated with the appearance of potentially infective aerosols, blood and saliva splashes. The aim of the present study was to investigate the quantitative contamination of protective eyewear during different dental treatments and the efficacy of the subsequent disinfection.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Materials and methods</jats:title>
<jats:p>Fifty-three standardized protective eyewear shields worn by students, dentists and dental assistants during different aerosol-producing dental treatment modalities (supragingival cleaning, subgingival periodontal instrumentation, trepanation and root canal treatment and carious cavity preparation; within all treatments, dental evacuation systems were used) were analysed, using common forensic techniques. For detection of blood contamination, luminol solution was applied onto the surface of safety shields. A special forensic test paper was used to visualize saliva contamination. Further analysis was conducted after standardized disinfection using the same techniques. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results</jats:title>
<jats:p>Macroscopically detectable contamination was found on 60.4% of protective eyewear surfaces. A contamination with blood (median 330 pixels, equivalent to 0.3% of the total surface) was detected on all shields after dental treatment. Between various dental treatments, the contamination with blood tend to be statistically significant (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.054). Highest amount of blood was observed after professional tooth cleaning (median 1,087 pixels). Significant differences of saliva contamination were detected between the different measurements (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.001) with contamination only after dental treatment. Due to the low variance and right-skewed distribution for saliva contamination, no statistical analysis between different treatments could be performed. After disinfection, 0.02% blood contamination and no saliva contamination were detected.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>
<jats:p>Disinfection is effective against blood and saliva contamination. Macroscopically, clean protective eyewear contains up to 12% surface contamination with blood. Based on the results, it may be concluded that protective eyewear is essential for each dental practitioner.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Clinical relevance</jats:title>
<jats:p>As standard for infection prevention in the dental practice, disinfection of protective eyewear after each patient is necessary.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>