Modifications of Surgical Suction Tip Geometry for Flow Optimisation: Influence on Suction-Induced Noise Pollution

Abstract

Introduction Suction devices for clearing the surgical field are among the most commonly used tools of every surgeon because a better view of the surgical field is essential. Forced suction may produce disturbingly loud noise, which acts as a nonnegligible stressor. Especially, in emergency situations with heavy bleeding, this loud noise has been described as an impeding factor in the medical decision-making process. In addition, there are reports of inner ear damage in patients due to suction noises during operations in the head area. These problems have not been solved yet. The purpose of this study was to analyse flow-dependent suction noise effects of different surgical suction tips. Furthermore, we developed design improvements to these devices. Methods We compared five different geometries of suction tips using an in vitro standardised setup. Two commercially available standard suction tips were compared to three adapted new devices regarding their flow-dependent (10–2000 mL/min) noise emission (dB, weighting filter (A), distance 10 cm) and acoustic quality of resulting noises (Hamilton fast Fourier analysis) during active suction at the liquid-air boundary. Noise maps at different flow rates were created for all five suction devices, and the proportion of extracted air was measured. The geometries of the three custom-made suction tips (new models 1, 2, and 3) were designed considering the insights after determining the key characteristics of the two standard suction models. Results The geometry of a suction device tip has significant impact on its noise emission. For the standard models, the frequency spectrum at higher flow rates significantly changes to high-frequency noise patterns (>3 kHz). A number of small side holes designed to prevent tissue adhesion lead to increased levels of high-frequency noise. Due to modifications of the tip geometry in our new models, we are able to achieve a highly significant reduction of noise level at low flow rates (new model 2 vs. standard models p < 0.001) and also the acoustic quality improved. Additionally, we attain a highly significant reduction of secondary air intake (new model 2 vs. the other models p < 0.001). Conclusion Improving flow-relevant features of the geometry of suction heads is a suitable way to reduce noise emissions. Optimized suction tips are significantly quieter. This may help us to reduce noise-induced hearing damage in patients as well as stress of medical staff during surgery and should lead to quieter operation theatres overall. Furthermore, the turbulence reduction and reduced secondary air intake during the suction process are expected to result in protective effects on the collected blood and thus could improve the quality of autologous blood retransfusions. We are on the way to evaluate potential benefits.

The Effect of Sound in the Dental Office: Practices and Recommendations for Quality Assurance—A Narrative Review

“…Regarding dentists and dental assistants, it was found that the aspirator, not the rotating instruments, was the most intense source of noise in the office [ 21 ]. The noise of the surgical suction can be reduced through innovative modifications and designs [ 92 ]. Another suggestion is that suctions should be used as little as possible and turned off completely when not required [ 1 ].…”

The Perception and Attitude Toward Noise and Music in the Operating Room: A Systematic Review

“…Decreasing noise pollution levels caused by surgical instruments and alarms, which are the main noise sources in the OR, 4 can be achieved through innovative equipment design. 61 As intraoperative music has significant beneficial effects, 12 implementing music through headphones for patients during surgery would both reduce unwanted noise pollution as well as provide music. Moreover, several studies have explored the use of intraoperative microphones and headphones for the OR team as well, 24,62 especially in regard to robotic surgery during which the surgeon is often placed at a considerable distance away from the operation table.…”

Aerosol and spatter mitigation in dentistry: Analysis of the effectiveness of 13 setups

“…During each experiment, a 30‐s noise measurement was made for each tested device, with the noise level recorded over a wide range of frequencies between 20 and 20,000 Hz. Between 2 and 8 kHz, sounds are perceived as 10–20 dB louder than outside this range at the same intensity 35 and in this frequency range, we also find essential parts of speech information 36 . For the analysis, we are reporting the total sound level (TSL) as computed by the application.…”