Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAli, Kamran
dc.contributor.authorRaja, M
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-25T17:08:41Z
dc.date.available2020-09-25T17:08:41Z
dc.date.issued2020-09
dc.identifier.issn1462-0049
dc.identifier.issn1476-5446
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/16428
dc.description.abstract

Cohort selection The aim was to evaluate interventions to minimise microbial contamination from aerosol generating procedures in the dental office. Seven electronic databases were searched using key words such as 'aerosols', 'droplets', 'spatter', 'microbial loads' etc to identify relevant randomised controlled trials and prospective non-randomised clinical trials until 6 April 2020.Data sources PubMed; Scopus; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Open Grey; ClinicalTrials.gov; National Research Register; and hand searches.Data analysis Eligible studies were analysed for effectiveness of various interventions on the microbial counts in the aerosols generated in the dental office using predefined criteria. Data were analysed for assessment of quality of evidence and confidence in the estimated effect, risk of bias and other analyses using Stata 15.1 software. PRISMA guidelines extension for network meta-analysis were followed for reporting.Results Initial search identified 266 studies, of which 35 were evaluated for full text. Finally, 29 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria for qualitative synthesis. The majority of the included studies were published in the last decade, and 21 out of the 29 studies were randomised controlled trials. However, based on comparable procedural settings (study design, study populations, interventions and outcome measures), only 11 were eligible for contribution to the network meta-analysis. The setting of all interventions was ultrasonic scaling of adult patients in a clinical dental practice environment, and involved 16 direct and 29 indirect comparisons. A multivariate meta-analysis showed pre-procedural mouth rinse with tempered chlorhexidine 0.2% at 47°C was most effective in reducing post-procedural bacterial load compared to the control. A mean difference of -0.92 (95% CI -15.4 to -0.29) in log10 colony-forming units was observed in air samples within 90 cm of the dental unit.Conclusions Notwithstanding the limitations of this network meta-analysis, pre-procedural mouth rinse with tempered chlorhexidine appears to be most effective in reducing bacterial counts in aerosols generated during dental operative procedures. Further randomised controlled clinical trials based on robust designs are required to establish the effectiveness of antimicrobial agents in reducing aerosol-related microbial loads (bacteria and viruses) in clinical environments.

dc.format.extent80-81
dc.format.mediumPrint
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectChlorhexidine
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMouthwashes
dc.subjectNetwork Meta-Analysis
dc.subjectProspective Studies
dc.subjectRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic
dc.titleEvidence-based strategies to reduce contamination from aerosolised microbes in dental practice environment
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeComment
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32978530
plymouth.issue3
plymouth.volume21
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalEvidence-Based Dentistry
dc.identifier.doi10.1038/s41432-020-0108-4
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2020-07-21
dc.rights.embargodate9999-12-31
dc.identifier.eissn1476-5446
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1038/s41432-020-0108-4
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2020-09
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV