Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “DENTAL EQUIPMENT”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Evaluation of field dental equipment in a deployment environment.

Dental officers and technicians must have reliable, durable, well-performing field dental equipment to enable them to provide dental care to deployed troops in operational environments. Unfortunately, no organized program exists to test such equipment before its purchase and use in the field. This article presents the results of a project conducted by the Naval Institute for Dental and Biomedical Research and the Air Force Dental Evaluation and Consultation Service to evaluate commercially available field dental equipment through laboratory testing and clinical-user evaluations in theater. The purpose of this 2-year project was to identify the best-performing and most cost-effective field dental equipment for possible future procurement. Initial laboratory testing was performed at the Naval Institute for Dental and Biomedical Research, and the equipment was then shipped to Kuwait for in-theater environmental and clinical-user testing. A seven-member scientific team of military dental officers and technicians was deployed for 1 month to perform in-theater testing under regional environmental conditions and to coordinate clinical-user evaluations. The testing provided beneficial results by identifying equipment that performed properly and equipment that exhibited shortcomings serious enough to render it inadequate for operational use. It is recommended that the project serve as a model for future testing and evaluation of medical/dental equipment by all of the military services.

Dental Equipment↗
PubMed1990

Problems with dental equipment and materials.

The proper selection of dental equipment and materials is of absolute importance in the successful practice of veterinary dentistry. Improper equipment can make a difficult procedure more time consuming or impossible to perform. Materials must be selected that can withstand the oral environment and biting forces of the animal. The purpose of this chapter is not to recommend specific products, but rather to increase the reader's basic understanding of the application and limitations of dental equipment and materials. With better comprehension of the properties of the materials, the veterinary dentist should be able to intelligently select products that will fit the specific needs of his or her veterinary dental practice.

Animals↗
PubMed1992

Cross-contamination potential with dental equipment.

Some types of reused dental equipment, especially handpieces and their attachments for drilling and cleaning teeth, might be responsible for cross-contamination if patient material were to lodge temporarily in difficult-to-disinfect internal mechanisms. This possibility is worrisome with respect to transmission of hepatitis B and human immunodeficiency viruses (HBV, HIV). Previous cross-contamination studies have relied on laboratory experiments with bacteria or dye tracers. To assess possible risk more thoroughly, we tested 30 new prophylaxis angles and 12 new high-speed handpieces to see whether they would take up and expel contaminants in laboratory and clinical trials. In treatments of three patients, including two infected with HIV, human-specific DNA (beta-globin, HLA DQ alpha) and HIV proviral DNA were detected inside or coming back from the devices. Similarly, when handpieces were operated in contact with blood pooled from HBV-infected patients, HBV DNA was detected in samples taken from inside the equipment and from their attached air/water hoses. When we used bacteriophage phi X174 as a model virus in laboratory tests, many infective viral particles were recovered from internal mechanisms of handpieces, their connecting air/water hoses, and from water spray expelled when the equipment was reused. We recommend that reused high-speed, air-driven handpieces and prophylaxis angles should be cleaned and heat-treated between patients. Further studies are needed to determine ways of eliminating the risks associated with exhaust hoses and air/water input lines.

Bacteriophages↗
PubMed1991

Dental equipment asepsis.

In the past, dental equipment was designed for function and esthetics with little regard for the potential for cross-contamination. Recent advances in equipment technology are making all forms of treatment equipment much easier to disinfect and sterilize. The use of barrier materials and effective sterilizing and disinfecting agents has further enhanced the capability of the dental staff to provide truly aseptic conditions in the treatment room. The overriding factor in all aspects of equipment sterilization and asepsis will continue to be practicality and cost. Protection procedures cannot completely overshadow delivery of quality patient care. Costs to the patient must be minimized, while allowing practitioners to provide optimum service. Common sense and experience will dictate practical standards and the profession must use all available means to assure that the standards are followed.

Asepsis↗
PubMed2004

Problems with the decontamination of dental handpieces and other intra-oral dental equipment in hospitals.

Dental departments within district general hospitals contain items of equipment that require decontamination between patients. Some of these items are complex and expensive, and in busy clinics, may be required in large numbers if a sterile services department (SSD) were to be used. This may result in local manual cleaning of these instruments and sterilization in non-vacuum downward displacement autoclaves within dental departments, despite some items having narrow lumens, deep recesses and cavities, which will not adequately sterilize these instruments. Infection control teams should be aware of these difficulties particularly when arranging satisfactory infection control and decontamination procedures in hospital dental departments.

Decontamination↗
PubMed2002

The effect of electrical dental equipment on a vagus nerve stimulator's function.

BACKGROUND: Dental patients who have epilepsy with pharmacologically refractory seizures may be treated with an implanted pulse generator that electrically stimulates the left vagus nerve. The pulse generator functions like a cardiac pacemaker. Some electrical dental devices have been shown to cause electromagnetic interference with the function of cardiac pacemakers. The potential effect of similar dental equipment on vagus nerve stimulators is unknown. METHODS: Common electrical dental devices were operated at maximum power settings in close proximity to a representative vagus nerve stimulator. The author assessed any interference of the dental devices with the nerve stimulator function by observing oscilloscope tracings. RESULTS: Under the conditions of this evaluation, none of the dental devices tested altered the function of the vagus nerve stimulator. CONCLUSIONS: Some commonly used electrical dental devices may be used in close proximity to patients who have implanted vagus nerve stimulators without adverse effects on the nerve stimulator function. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Dentists and dental hygienists may encounter patients with implanted vagus nerve stimulators, and they need to be cognizant of developments in the treatment of epilepsy. Under the conditions of this study, use of common dental electrical devices did not alter the function of a vagus nerve stimulator. The findings of this study, however, should not be generalized to all types of electrical dental or medical devices, as a recent report indicates that treatment with diathermy devices is contraindicated for patients with implanted nerve stimulators.

Dental Amalgam↗