Comparison of effectiveness disinfection of 2% glutaraldehyde and 4.8% chloroxylenol on tooth extraction instruments in the Department of Oral Maxillofacial and Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, University of North Sumatera

Abstract

Material and Methods: This was an experimental study with posttest only control group design approach. Purposive technique is applied to collect samples which are lower molar extraction forceps. In this study, sample were divided into 2 groups and each consisting of 18 instruments. The treatment group was treated with 2% glutaraldehyde while the control group was treated with 4.8% chloroxylenol. Each instrument was pre-cleaned using a brush, water and soap for both groups underwent the disinfection process. Results: The results were statistically analyzed using Mann-Whitney Test. The comparison between glutaraldehyde and chloroxylenol showed a significant difference to the total bacteria count on instrument after disinfection (p=0.014 < 0.05). Conclusion: 2% glutaraldehyde was more effective than 4.8% chloroxylenol at disinfecting lower molar extraction forceps.

The disinfection effectiveness of ozone water and 4.8% chloroxylenol against the number of bacterial colonies in dental extraction instruments at the USU Dental and Oral Hospital in October-December 2022

“…The research by Riza et al in 2018 showed 11 out of 18 mandibular molar tooth extraction forceps which were cleaned using 4.8% chloroxylenol did not form bacterial colonies, and seven mandibular molar tooth extraction forceps had a maximum bacterial count of 812 Á 10 3 CFU/mL and the average number of bacterial colonies formed was 82.5. 13 This is in accordance with the results of this study: in all research samples bacterial colonies still formed although with fewer bacterial colonies on average. Guther et al, 2020, who conducted research on the skin and the hospital environment, found that 4.8% chloroxylenol could interfere with the metabolic activity of Grampositive bacteria by 38.9% and Gram-negative by 60.7%.…”

“…9 In the 4.8% chloroxylenol treatment group, mandibular molar extraction pliers were soaked for 60 minutes and then samples were taken. 13 In the negative control group (Aquadest) the pliers were rinsed with distilled water, then a sample was taken.…”

“…Taking the samples Sampling was carried out by immersing mandibular molar extraction pliers in a container containing 250 mL of saline solution for five minutes, then the container was closed and labeled for each sample. 13 Group label for ozonized water was Z, 4.8% chloroxylenol was K, and distilled water was A.…”

“…9 Research on the effectiveness of 4.8% chloroxylenol as a disinfecting agent showed its ability to interfere with the metabolic activity of Gram-positive bacteria at 38.9% concentration and Gram-negative at 60.7% concentration. 13 This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of ozone water and 4.8% chloroxylenol disinfectants on tooth extraction instruments, because tthese critical instruments have a high risk of causing infection as they penetrate the mucous membranes of the oral cavity. 14…”

Comparison of effectiveness disinfection of glutaraldehyde 2% and hydrogen peroxide 3% on tooth extraction instruments in Department of Oral Surgery and Maxillofacial, Faculty of Dentistry, University Sumatera Utara

“…Hydrogen peroxide is also widely used in the household and in medical field as antiseptic, bleaching or oxidator material and disinfectant as well as surface / environmental cleaning. 6, 9 The spaulding classification describes three instruments/risk categories (critical, semi-critical and non-critical), each of which has specific reprocessing requirements. According to the Spaulding classification, lower molar extraction forceps are classified as critical items, objects that enter sterile tissue or vascular system should be sterile because any microbial contamination could result in disease transmission.…”