Statistical Analysis for Subjective and Objective Evaluations of Dental Drill Sounds

Abstract

The sound produced by a dental air turbine handpiece (dental drill) can markedly influence the sound environment in a dental clinic. Indeed, many patients report that the sound of a dental drill elicits an unpleasant feeling. Although several manufacturers have attempted to reduce the sound pressure levels produced by dental drills during idling based on ISO 14457, the sound emitted by such drills under active drilling conditions may negatively influence the dental clinic sound environment. The physical metrics related to the unpleasant impressions associated with dental drill sounds have not been determined. In the present study, psychological measurements of dental drill sounds were conducted with the aim of facilitating improvement of the sound environment at dental clinics. Specifically, we examined the impressions elicited by the sounds of 12 types of dental drills in idling and drilling conditions using a semantic differential. The analysis revealed that the impressions of dental drill sounds varied considerably between idling and drilling conditions and among the examined drills. This finding suggests that measuring the sound of a dental drill in idling conditions alone may be insufficient for evaluating the effects of the sound. We related the results of the psychological evaluations to those of measurements of the physical metrics of equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure levels (LAeq) and sharpness. Factor analysis indicated that impressions of the dental drill sounds consisted of two factors: “metallic and unpleasant” and “powerful”. LAeq had a strong relationship with “powerful impression”, calculated sharpness was positively related to “metallic impression”, and “unpleasant impression” was predicted by the combination of both LAeq and calculated sharpness. The present analyses indicate that, in addition to a reduction in sound pressure level, refining the frequency components of dental drill sounds is important for creating a comfortable sound environment in dental clinics.

Vibroacoustic analysis of dental air turbine noise

“…Concerns have been raised about hearing impairment to dentist from dental air turbine noise, and there have been numerous articles reporting an association between dental air turbine noise and hearing damage [ 6 – 9 ]. After reviewing 17 articles that assessed noise level in dental environments, Henneberry et al warned oral health professionals of potential hearing loss due to exposure to excessive noise limits (85 dBA) [ 10 ]. It has also been reported that the noise of a dental air turbine can cause fear and anxiety in patients [ 10 – 14 ].…”

A Novel Method for Adjusting the Taper and Adaption of Automatic Tooth Preparations with a High-Power Femtosecond Laser

“…Misuse of these tools can result in excessive or inadequate preparation and potential injury to the gingiva, tongue, and buccal and labial mucosa. Additionally, high-speed dental turbines generate vibrations and sharp noises, which can make patients uncomfortable [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. Furthermore, the currently used laser and dental turbines may stimulate the dental pulp, which can lead patients to endure varying degrees of pain [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 ].…”

BRIX3000® Papain Gel for Cavity Treatment in the Adult Patient

“…Pain is a subjective experience and is a symptom that undermines the patient's physical and mental integrity; moreover, it is closely related to fear, which is the individual's response to a threatening event. Dental anxiety is regarded as a serious health issue worldwide [ 7 ]. A dental phobia is a persistent and excessive fear of dental stimuli and procedures that results in avoidance or significant distress with impact on individual's normal routine, social relationships, occupational or school functioning, and social relationships [ 8 ].…”

“…Some studies in the literature have shown that the perceived pain was less when chemo-mechanical removal agents were used to remove caries compared to conventional rotary tools [ 18 ]. In other studies, it has emerged that chemo-mechanical caries removal agents have a very slow action compared to mechanical tools; moreover, it seems that they can be used together to completely remove the carious lesion tissue [ 7 ]. It has also emerged that the taste and odour of these used agents based on sodium hypochlorite were unpleasant [ 19 ].…”