Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2015; 4(03): 113-116
DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.163321
Original Article

Chlorine dioxide: An ideal preprocedural mouthrinse in dental set-up

Rajiv Saini
Department of Periodontology, Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences, Loni, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
 PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background: Aerosols generated during ultrasonic scaling is a potential risk factor for cross-contamination in dental settings. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the efficacy of commercially available chlorine dioxide as preprocedural mouthrinses in reducing the level of viable bacteria in aerosols. Materials and Methods: This single-center clinical double-blinded study was conducted over a period of 4 months. A total of 80 patients were divided randomly into two groups (A and B) of 40 patients each to receive the chlorine dioxide mouthwash and water as preprocedural rinse. The aerosol produced by the ultrasonic unit was collected at five standardized location with respect to the reference point, that is, the mouth of the patient. The blood agar plates were incubated at 37°C for 48 h, and total number of colony-forming units (CFUs) was counted and statistically analyzed. Results: The results showed that CFUs in test group A were significantly reduced compared with control group B, P < 0.001 (analysis of variance). The numbers of CFUs were highest in the patient chest area and lowest at the patient front, that is, 6 o′ clock position. Conclusion: This study proves that a regular preprocedural mouthrinse with chlorine dioxide could significantly reduce aerosols generated during professional oral prophylaxis.

Keywords

Aerosols - chlorine dioxide - mouthrinses - ultrasonic scaling


Publication History

Article published online:
01 November 2021

© 2015. European Journal of General Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Laheij AM, Kistler JO, Belibasakis GN, Välimaa H, de Soet JJ. European Oral Microbiology Workshop (EOMW) 2011. Healthcare-associated viral and bacterial infections in dentistry. J Oral Microbiol 2012;4:1-10.
  • 2 Litsky BY, Mascis JD, Litsky W. Use of an antimicrobial mouthwash to minimize the bacterial aerosol contamination generated by the high-speed drill. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1970;29:25-30.
  • 3 Muir KF, Ross PW, MacPhee IT, Holbrook WP, Kowolik MJ. Reduction of microbial contamination from ultrasonic scalers. Br Dent J 1978;145:76-8.
  • 4 Leggat PA, Kedjarune U. Bacterial aerosols in the dental clinic: A review. Int Dent J 2001;51:39-44.
  • 5 Bentley CD, Burkhart NW, Crawford JJ. Evaluating spatter and aerosol contamination during dental procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125:579-84.
  • 6 Jones CG. Chlorhexidine: Is it still the gold standard? Periodontol 2000 1997;15:55-62.
  • 7 Santos A. Evidence-based control of plaque and gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol 2003;30 Suppl 5:13-6.
  • 8 Harrel SK, Molinari J, Hidalgo FR. Aerosol and splatter in dentistry: A brief review of literature and infection control implications. J Am Dent Assoc 2004;135:1241-9.
  • 9 Toroglu MS, Bayramoglu O, Yarkin F, Tuli A. Possibility of blood and hepatitis B contamination through aerosols generated during debonding procedures. Angle Orthod 2003;73:571-8.
  • 10 Bentley C, Nancy W. Evaluating spatter and aerosol contamination. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125:579-84.