The Complete Dental Cleaning

Niemiec, Brook A.

doi:10.1002/9781118705018.ch10

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is well-known that the use of such instruments carries the risk of mechanical and thermal damage. However, comments on their use are usually limited to general advice such as using the side of the scaler, moving it continually, staying on one tooth no longer than 15 s, and applying no or minimal pressure (Caiafa 2007;Holmstrom 2013b;McMahon 2013;Niemiec 2013). The clinical significance of power-driven scaler use is accentuated by the fact that professional treatment is valued much more than thorough homecare by human patients (Needleman et al 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Powerdriven scalers are ultrasonic (magnetostrictive or piezoelectric) or sonic according to the source of oscillation (Robinson 2007;Niemiec 2013). Powerdriven scalers should be used carefully because of the risks for both the patient and dentist/hygienist (Gorrel 2004;Niemiec 2013). Most studies consider magnetostrictive and piezoelectric scalers to be equal or only marginally different with respect to risks (Yousefimanesh 2012), although sonic scalers are sometimes considered to be less dangerous (Caiafa 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The antimicrobial effects of supragingival scaling have been questioned (Schenk et al 2000), although Thurnheer et al (2013) proved that ultrasonic scalers are capable of biofilm detachment. Powerdriven scalers are ultrasonic (magnetostrictive or piezoelectric) or sonic according to the source of oscillation (Robinson 2007;Niemiec 2013). Powerdriven scalers should be used carefully because of the risks for both the patient and dentist/hygienist (Gorrel 2004;Niemiec 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Three-dimensional optical assessment of experimental iatrogenic mechanical damage to canine dental enamel caused by a sonic scaler

Janalík¹,

Fichtel²,

Šperka³

et al. 2014

Vet. Med. - Czech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Removal of dental calculus deposits is one of the basic parts of professional dental cleaning. Despite the popularity of power-driven scalers, several risks are associated with their use, mechanical damage of the enamel surface being one of the most important. The present study evaluated enamel damage caused by a sonic scaler in different work patterns to quantify the damage and allow a clear comparison. Seventy-five canine teeth were carefully extracted from twenty-three dogs. The scaler was used on a clean surface with several combinations of time (five to twenty seconds) and parts of the scaler (point vs. side of the tip). Subsequently, damaged surface topography was mapped using three-dimensional optical microscopy. The results revealed a high variance in defect depth which was influenced by both factors. Statistical assessment confirmed highly significant (P < 0.001) or at least significant (P < 0.05) differences in data acquired for each group. As expected, the shallowest defects were produced by the scaler side in the shortest experimental period (five seconds). Point use proved to be quite damaging, as it resulted in approximately four times higher median values than the side in the same timeframe. Therefore, it is crucial to follow all safety precautions when handling a power-driven scaler even during routine treatments. Use of the side of the tip and constant movement on the tooth surface are essential to reduce the risk of enamel damage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%