Microbial contamination of the dental unit waterlines – a matter of following instructions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rolf Claesson ◽  
Stig Edwardsson ◽  
Nils Bäckman
Keyword(s):  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Following Instructions ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines

scholarly journals Microbial contamination of dental unit waterlines: the scientific argument

1998 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 359-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline L. Pankhurst ◽  
N.W. Johnson ◽  
R.G. Woods
Keyword(s):  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines ◽  
Scientific Argument

scholarly journals Microbial contamination in dental unit waterlines

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Cristina Monteiro de Souza-Gugelmin ◽  
Carolina Della Torre Lima ◽  
Sergio Narciso Marques de Lima ◽  
Henis Mian ◽  
Izabel Yoko Ito
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Water Reservoir ◽  
Plate Count ◽  
Plate Count Agar ◽  
Quality Of Water ◽  
Colony Forming Units ◽  
Dental Staff ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines

The quality of water in a dental unit is of considerable importance because patients and dental staff are regularly exposed to water and aerosol generated from the dental unit. The aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of microbial contamination in dental unit waterlines. Water samples were collected aseptically from the waterlines (reservoir, triple-syringe, high-speed) of 15 dental units. After serial dilution to 1:10(6) in APHA, the samples were seeded by the pour-plate technique and cultured in plate count agar (Difco) for 48 h at 32ºC. Analysis was based on the number of colony forming units (CFU). The Wilcoxon non-parametric test indicated that the levels of water contamination were highest in the triple-syringe (13 of 15) and in the high-speed (11 of 15); both levels were higher than those of the water reservoir. There was no significant statistical difference between the level of contamination in the triple-syringe and the high-speed as determined by the Mann-Whitney test [p(H0) = 40.98%; Z = - 0.2281]. Because biofilm forms on solid surfaces constantly bathed by liquid where microorganisms are present, these results indicate that the water in the dental unit may be contaminated by biofilm that forms in these tubules.

scholarly journals Disinfection of Dental Unit Water Line Using Aloe Vera: In Vitro Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia Pareek ◽  
Anup Nagaraj ◽  
Prateek Sharma ◽  
Mansi Atri ◽  
Satinder Walia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hydrogen Peroxide ◽  
Sodium Hypochlorite ◽  
Water Samples ◽  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Aloe Vera ◽  
Microbiological Quality ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Viable Count ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines

Context. Dental unit waterlines may be heavily contaminated with microorganisms and are a potential source of infection for both practicing staff and immunocompromised patients particularly. Contamination of dental unit water lines could be inhibited with the use of disinfectants. The present study investigates the effect of aloe-vera-based disinfectant in reducing the microbial growth in dental unit water lines (DUWLs).Aims. To compare the efficacy of aloe vera, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and 5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) in controlling microbial contamination of DUWLs.Materials and Methods. After obtaining baseline water samples, the dental unit waterlines were treated with aloe vera, 10% hydrogen peroxide, and 5% sodium hypochlorite. Each of the three disinfectants was used in increasing concentrations and their inhibiting effect was compared. Water samples were analyzed for microbiological quality by the total viable count (TVC) method.Statistical Analysis Used. SPSS 16.Results. There was significant reduction in mean CFU/ml when treated with disinfectants each for a period of one week. Aloe-vera solution was found to be the most effective in reducing the microbial colonies.Conclusions. Improving the water quality from dental unit water lines is of considerable importance; chemical-based disinfectants can be replaced with herbal disinfectants for treating microbial contamination in dental unit waterlines.

scholarly journals Reducing Bacterial Counts in Dental Unit Waterlines: Tap Water vs. Distilled Water

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Kettering ◽  
Joni A. Stephens ◽  
Carlos A. Muñoz-Viveros ◽  
W. Patrick Naylor
Keyword(s):  
Water Samples ◽  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Dental Treatment ◽  
Tap Water ◽  
Water System ◽  
Distilled Water ◽  
Bacterial Reduction ◽  
Bacterial Counts ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines ◽  
Group 5

Abstract Background The maximum recommended level of microbial contamination of water from dental unit waterlines (DUWL) is 200 colony-forming units per milliliter (CFU/mL). This article addresses the importance of water selection in achieving that standard. Methods Microbial contamination in water samples from 75 new dental units, with a closedcircuit water system, were compared using combinations of tap water and sterile distilled water with and without two chemical disinfectants (bleach and 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate, Bio2000) over a six-week period. Baseline tap water samples were collected and tested initially. Results The microbial plate counts of seven tap water specimens (controls) ranged from 4 to 95 CFU/mL. These results were well below both the 500 CFU/mL standard for public drinking water and the 200 CFU/mL goal for dental treatment water. However, when passed through dental units, no significant bacterial reduction was achieved for samples of tap water (Group 1), tap water treated with bleach (Group 2), or tap water treated with Bio2000 (Group 4). Only water samples from dental units using Bio2000 alone (Group 3) or a combination of sterile, distilled water with Bio2000 (Group 5) met or exceeded the 200 CFU/mL standard. Conclusions Using tap water alone or tap water with bleach did not improve water quality. However, the American Dental Association (ADA) standard for reduced microbial contamination of dental unit waterlines was met using Bio2000 and distilled water treated with Bio2000. Clinical Significance The ADA standard of 200 CFU/mL was achieved using a closed water system and distilled water treated with Bio2000. Using 100% Bio2000 is also effective, but more costly. Citation Kettering JD, Stephens JD, Muñoz-Viveros CA, et. al. Reducing Bacterial Counts in Dental Unit Waterlines: Tap Water versus Distilled Water. J Contemp Dent Pract 2002 August;(3)3: 001-009.

scholarly journals Microbial Contamination of Dental Unit Waterlines and Potential Risk of Infection: A Narrative Review

Pathogens ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 651
Author(s):  
Anna Maria Spagnolo ◽  
Marina Sartini ◽  
Maria Luisa Cristina
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
High Surface ◽  
Volume Ratio ◽  
Working Hours ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Dental Staff ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines ◽  
Main Determinants ◽  
Micro Organisms

Several studies have revealed that dental unit waterlines (DUWLs) are often contaminated by large numbers of various micro-organisms (bacteria, fungi, protozoa, viruses). Microbial contamination in DUWLs may originate from the mains water piped into the dental unit, the suck-back of patients’ saliva into the line due to the lack of adequate valves, and contamination from bottled water systems. Some of the main determinants of microbial contamination in DUWLs are: a very small lumen size (0.5–2 mm) of the tubing used, high surface-to-volume ratio (6:1), low throughput and the materials of which the tubing is made, water stagnation outside of working hours. The environmental conditions present inside the conduits of the dental unit may facilitate the proliferation of micro-organisms and the consequent formation of biofilm on the interior surface of the pipes of DUWLs. During the use of handpieces, particularly high-speed rotating instruments, a spray is thrown up in the form of aerosols or spatters containing biological material (saliva, blood and dental plaque) and micro-organisms. This means that the health of both dental staff and patients could be at risk of infection. The risk of cross-infections in dental settings can be tackled by implementing combined interventions to prevent the contamination of DUWLs.

Microbial Contamination of Dental Unit Waterlines: Prevalence, Intensity and Microbiological Characteristics

1993 ◽  
Vol 124 (10) ◽  
pp. 59-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey F. Williams ◽  
A. Margaret Johnston ◽  
Bradley Johnson ◽  
Mark K. Huntington ◽  
Charles D. Mackenzie
Keyword(s):  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Microbiological Characteristics ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines

Microbial contamination of dental unit waterlines in Istanbul, Turkey

2008 ◽  
Vol 147 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 265-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duygu Göksay ◽  
Ayşın Çotuk ◽  
Zuhal Zeybek
Keyword(s):  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines

Evaluation of Microbial Profile in Dental Unit Waterlines and Assessment of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Two Treating Agents

2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 367-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Mungara ◽  
NC Dilna ◽  
E Joseph ◽  
N Reddy
Keyword(s):  
Water Samples ◽  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Povidone Iodine ◽  
Tap Water ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Water Source ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Dental Clinics ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Dental Unit Waterlines

The quality of water in a dental unit used for cooling and flushing the high and low speed handpiece, air/water syringes and the scalers is of considerable importance. The present study was carried out to enumerate and identify the microorganisms present in water samples collected from dental unit waterlines of different dental specialty clinics and to find out the efficacy of two treating agents in disinfecting dental unit waterlines. Study design: Sample included 70 dental unit waterlines from different speciality dental clinics which were checked for microbial contamination. From these dental units 40 units were randomly selected and divided into two groups of 20 each. Group A, treatment was done in 20 dental units with 0.2% Chlorhexidine gluconate solution and Group B, treatment was done in 20 dental units with 10% Povidone iodine solution and the reduction in the microbial levels were assessed. Five dental units were randomly selected and checked the microbial contamination using mineral water, sterile distilled water, fresh tap water as a water source in the dental unit reservoir bottles. Also from the test group, five from each group were checked for the duration of efficacy of treating agent for one week by analyzing the water samples collected on 3 ,5 and 7 day intervals. Results: Most of the identified microorganisms are Gram negative and pseudomonas predominating up to 98.59% of the total isolates. Usage of disinfectants 0.2% Chlorhexidine and 10% Povidone Iodine were found to be very effective in reducing the microbial contamination and 10% Povidone iodine was found to be more efficient (97.13%) and active for a period of 3 days and gradually loosing its efficacy by 7th day. No significant difference were found in microbial contamination of water samples collected from different water outlets such as handpiece outlets, air water syringe outlets, scaler lines. Conclusion: To continue maintaining the sterility of the Dental unit waterlines and to complete the infection control measures adopted in the dental clinics, suitable disinfectants like 0.2% Chlorhexidine on daily basis or 10% Povidone iodine on every 3rd day basis intermittently maintain the sterility of dental unit waterlines it is essential to have a good water source and an effective disinfectant.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document