Quality of cross-infection control in dental laboratories. A critical systematic review

Vázquez‐Rodríguez, Inés; Estany‐Gestal, Ana; Romero, Juan Manuel; Mora, María Jesús; Varela‐Centelles, Pablo; Santana‐Mora, Urbano

doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzy058

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Firstly, the use of all PPEs is always required because of the infective risk and the occupational hazard due to splash in the case of immersion, air contamination in the case of spray, or dryout with compressed air. Studies, among DHCP and dental technicians within different Nations (UK, Pakistan, South Arabia, Iran), indicated a wide variety of chemical solutions and concentrations were used to disinfect impression materials [10, 44, 45, 59–61]. This is indicative of the degree of confusion and difficulties in the choice of the proper disinfectant with inadequate recommendations and insufficient knowledge.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data shows the limited awareness on infection prevention and very poor compliance of infection control procedures by most DLs during the manufacture of dental prostheses and orthodontic appliances; in particular, studies show inadequate adoption of standard precautions in terms of the use of PPEs, disinfection of impression and appliances, and vaccinations [5–10]. DTs are exposed to microorganisms via direct contact with nondisinfected items (i.e., impressions) through cuts and abrasions mainly on ungloved hands.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, traditional procedures suffer from (a) compatibility problems among items and disinfectants and (b) limited compliance, errors, and lapses during infection prevention, which are very frequent in dental offices. In addition, data indicates the limited awareness of infection prevention guidelines and insufficient compliance with infection prevention by most dental laboratories (DLs) during the manufacture of dental prostheses and orthodontic appliances [5–10]. Contaminated items often come and go from the clinic to the DLs and vice versa, and this increases the hazard, the possibility of microbial reservoirs, and the chance of infection transmission [2, 5–13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Innovation by Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Technology: A Look at Infection Prevention in Dental Settings

Barenghi¹,

Barenghi

Cadeo

et al. 2019

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent data indicates limited awareness and compliance on infection prevention procedures by dental offices and by dental laboratories. Guidelines for infection prevention in dentistry have been published by Centres for Disease Control and Prevention since 2003; the section “IX-Special consideration” includes a subsection concerning the prevention in dental laboratories, but it has not been modernised in later versions to fit the needs of traditional and computer-aided technology. Traditional techniques required disinfecting items (impression, chewing waxes, and appliances) with well-suited products, which are also chosen for limiting impression changes or appliance deterioration. Effective procedures are available with difficulties. Some of these contain irritant or non-eco-friendly disinfectants. The transport of impression, to dental laboratories, is often delayed with limited precautions for limiting cross-infection. Gypsum casts are frequently contaminated mainly by bacteria and their antibiotic-resistant strains and even stored for long periods during dental implant supported restoration and orthodontic therapy, becoming a hidden source of infection. Nowadays, computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing technology seems to be an interesting way to promote both business and safety, being more comfortable for patients and more accurate than traditional technology. A further advantage is easier infection prevention since, for the most part, mainly digital impression and casts are not a source of cross-infection and the transport of contaminated items is reduced and limited to try-in stages. Nevertheless, a peculiar feature is that a digital electronic file is of course unalterable, but may be ruined by a computer virus. Additionally, the reconditioning of scanner tips is determinant for the optical characteristics and long term use of the scanner, but information for its reconditioning from producers is often limited. This study focuses on some critical points including (a) insufficient guidelines, (b) choice of proper procedure for scanner reconditioning, and (c) data protection in relation to patient privacy.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Innovation by Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Technology: A Look at Infection Prevention in Dental Settings

Barenghi¹,

Barenghi

Cadeo

et al. 2019

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 Dental care professionals are more prone for the exposure of any infectious materials, including body fluids such as blood, droplets either directly through needle stick injury, splash or indirectly through contamination of instruments or equipment. 7 Every healthcare system should have an infection control program.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross infection control in private dental practice in Karachi, Sindh.

Das

Samejo

Ahmed³

et al. 2019

TPMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Aim of this study was to assess that what measures were taken routinely by private dental practitioners regarding cross infection control. Study Design: Cross sectional study. Setting: Private dental practitioners in Karachi. Period: 01-04-2018 to 30-09-2018. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire comprised of 10 questions was prepared regarding measures taken for infection control in private dental practice. The questionnaire was distributed randomly among 130 private dental practitioners by hand to carry out a cross sectional study on cross Infection control among the private dental practitioners in Karachi. The each question had two options (YES OR NO), and the respondents had to select one of the two. Results: The questionnaire was sent to 130 private dental practitioners, out of which 111 dentists responded and returned the questionnaire. The response rate was 85%. Following are the results obtained. 85% of participants asked detailed medical history. Majority of dentists (78%) were immunized against hepatitis B. 95 % of the participants stated that they wore gloves during dental treatment and change on each patient. Mask was worn and changed on each patient by 67% of dentists during treatment. Protective eyeglasses and protective face shield were worn by 20% and 2 % of respondents respectively during dental treatment. Majority of dentists (84%) used autoclave to sterilize the hand piece and 16% dentists used sterilized hand piece on each patient. 100% participants changed instruments such as extraction instruments, saliva ejector, hand piece, impression trays on each patient. Only 3% of participant disinfected the impression before sending to laboratory. Only 17 % participants used special container to disposal off sharp objects. Conclusion: Cross infection control measures need to be improved in private dental practice.

show abstract

“…Disinfection of dental impressions, as well as incoming and outgoing laboratory items, is an important link in the chain of cross‐contamination control in dental care, and existing protocols include this aspect in their recommendations . Unfortunately, these recommendations do not always seem to be fulfilled either from the laboratory or from the clinic side of the process. Although no information on the actual impact of this phenomenon could be retrieved, the documented contagions of dental technicians from contaminated laboratory items and the reported under‐registration of cross‐contamination events in dental clinics draw attention to this issue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing gaps in transversal educational contents in undergraduate dental education. The audio‐visual ‘pill of knowledge’ approach

Vázquez‐Rodríguez

Rodríguez-López

Blanco-Hortas³

et al. 2019

Eur J Dental Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Training on impression disinfection is often limited to brief explanations in the clinic. This investigation assessed knowledge on this topic amongst clinical students in our university, produced a pill of knowledge to suit their needs, and evaluated its impact and acceptance. Material and Methods:A pre-post study was designed to identify knowledge gaps using an anonymous, voluntary self-applied questionnaire before and after watching an audio-visual clip (pill of knowledge). All 136 students in the school were invited to enter the study (estimated sample size: 116).Results: Participants: 109 (26.6% in 3rd year; 37.6% in 4th year and 39.4% in 5th year).Participation dropped 10.29% (n = 95) in the post-intervention survey. Knowledge improvement was higher for those impression materials included in the pill. Most students (68.4%) reported to know more about impression disinfection after the pill and 70.5% felt more able to achieve correct disinfection. The pill was particularly well received (86.3%). All students would recommend it to their peers, and 93.5% are willing to receive pills on other topics. Discussion:Our results disclosed an important gap in knowledge, which can be filled by a single, brief and concise pill adapted to the intended audience. Once made readily available through digital repositories, it may help solve this problem, given the ubiquitous presence of mobile devices. Conclusions:Our results found pills of knowledge as a useful approach to facilitating undergraduates' learning process. This method, using suitable information and communication technologies, has the potential to improve the performance on certain clinical tasks.

show abstract

Quality of cross-infection control in dental laboratories. A critical systematic review

Abstract: Sub-standard cross-contamination practices seem to be a common finding in dental laboratories, which may well compromise the quality of certain dental treatments.

Cited by 23 publications

References 23 publications

Innovation by Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Technology: A Look at Infection Prevention in Dental Settings

Innovation by Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Technology: A Look at Infection Prevention in Dental Settings

Cross infection control in private dental practice in Karachi, Sindh.

Addressing gaps in transversal educational contents in undergraduate dental education. The audio‐visual ‘pill of knowledge’ approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About