Air microbial contamination in dental clinics: comparison between active and passive methods

Air microbial contamination in dental clinics: comparison between active and passive methods

Authors

  • Licia Veronesi University of Parma http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5399-2934
  • Maria Eugenia Colucci University di Parma http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4971-594X
  • Christian Napoli University of Rome
  • Paolo Castiglia University of Sassari
  • Giorgio Liguori University of Naples “Parthenope”
  • Ida Torre University of Napoli “Federico II”
  • Elena Righi University of Modena and Reggio Emilia
  • Patrizia Farruggia Local Health Authority of Bologna
  • Marina Tesauro University of Milan
  • Maria Teresa Montagna University of Bari “ Aldo Moro”
  • Francesca Gallè University of Naples “Parthenope”
  • Maria Dolores Masia University of Sassari
  • Valeria Di Onofrio University of Naples “Parthenope”
  • Giuseppina Caggiano University of Bari “ Aldo Moro”
  • Carola Tinteri University of Genova
  • Manuela Panico Local Health Authority of Bologna
  • Francesca Pennino University of Napoli “Federico II”
  • Lucia Cannova University of Palermo
  • Cesira Pasquarella University di Parma https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1566-3854
DOI: https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v91i3-S.9440

Keywords:

dental clinic, microbial contamination, air, active sampling, passive sampling, correlation

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the microbial air contamination values obtained by active sampling (colony-forming units per cubic metre, CFU/m3) and by passive sampling (Index of microbial air contamination, IMA) and to calculate the corresponding equations. Air sampling was performed in ten dental clinics (DC), before (T0), during (T1) and after (T2) the clinical activity, for five consecutive days, once a month for a period of three months, for a total of 450 air samplings. The correlation was evaluated using the Spearman test, and a p value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. A statistically significant correlation was found considering both the results obtained from the total observations and from the single sampling times, T0, T1 and T2. Different correlation patterns were observed stratifying by DC. Both methods were able to evaluate the microbial air quality and highlight critical situations; therefore, both can be used with this aim. However, in particular during the activity, passive sampling resulted more sensitive, and for its simplicity, economy and standardization by IMA, as suggested by several authors, can be suggested for routine monitoring.

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for Infection Control in Dental Health‐Care Setting, 2003.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Summary of Infection Prevention Practices in Dental Clinic Setting. Basic Expectation for Safe Care. 2016.
3. Laheij AMGA, Kistler JO, Belibasakis GN, H. Välimaa H, de Soet JJ, European Oral Microbiology Workshop (EOMW). Healthcare-associated viral and bacterial infections in dentistry. Journal of Oral Microbiology 2012; 4.
4. Rautemaa R, Nordberg A, Wuolijoki-Saaristo K, Meurman JH. Bacterial aerosols in dental practice - A potential hospital infection problem? J Hosp Infect 2006; 64: 76-81.
5. Dacraene V, Ready D, Pratten J, Wilson M. Air-borne microbial contamination of surfaces in a UK dental clinic. J Gen Appl Microbiol 2008; 54: 195-203.
6. Castiglia P, Liguori G, Montagna MT et al. Italian multicenter study on infection hazards during dental practice: control of environmental microbial contamination in public dental surgeries. BMC Public Health 2008; 29;8:187.
7. Pasquarella C, Veronesi L, Castiglia P, et al. Italian multicentre study on microbial environmental contamination in dental clinics: a pilot study. Sci Total Environ 2010; 408(19):4045-51.
8. Pasquarella C, Veronesi L, Napoli C, et al. Microbial environmental contamination in Italian dental clinics: A multicenter study yielding recommendations for standardized sampling methods and threshold values. Sci Total Environ 2012;420:289-99.
9. Pasquarella C, Albertini R, Dall'Aglio P, Saccani E, Sansebastiano G. Signorelli C. Air microbial sampling: the state of the art. Ig San Pubb 2008; 79–120.
10. Pitzurra M, Savino A, Pasquarella C. Microbiological environmental monitoring. Ann Ig 1997; 9(6):439-54.
11. Pasquarella C, Pitzurra O, Savino A. The index of microbial air contamination. J Hosp Infect 2000;46:241–56.
12. Petti S, Iannazzo S, Tarsitani G. Comparison between different methods to monitor the microbial level of indoor air contamination in dental office. Ann Ig 2003; 15(5): 725-33.
13. European Commission. EC Guide to Good Manufacturing Practice. Revision to Annex 1. Manufacture of Sterile Medicinal Products. Brussels, 2008.

Downloads

Published

10-04-2020

Issue

Vol. 91 No. 3-S (2020): Road to Rome 2020 - Special issue to promote the 16th World Congress on Public Health (WCPH) - Guest Editors: Gaetano Maria Fara, Carlo Signorelli

Section

SHORT REPORT

License

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Transfer of Copyright and Permission to Reproduce Parts of Published Papers. 
Authors retain the copyright for their published work. No formal permission will be required to reproduce parts (tables or illustrations) of published papers, provided the source is quoted appropriately and reproduction has no commercial intent. Reproductions with commercial intent will require written permission and payment of royalties.

How to Cite

1.
Air microbial contamination in dental clinics: comparison between active and passive methods. Acta Biomed [Internet]. 2020 Apr. 10 [cited 2024 Jul. 3];91(3-S):165-7. Available from: https://mattioli1885journals.com/index.php/actabiomedica/article/view/9440
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC