World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 10 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2019 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Efficacy of Infection Control Barrier on Cross Contamination and its Effect on the Intensity Variation

Devarasa G Murugeshappa, Swarna Y Math, Dheeraj Kalra, Wong H Zhang, Lyster E Loo, Hii L Ming

Keywords : Bacterial contamination, Cling films, Cross-infection control, Light-curing unit, Sleeves, Wrapping

Citation Information : Murugeshappa DG, Math SY, Kalra D, Zhang WH, Loo LE, Ming HL. Efficacy of Infection Control Barrier on Cross Contamination and its Effect on the Intensity Variation. World J Dent 2019; 10 (4):285-290.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1647

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-08-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim: To compare and assess the level of infection control provided by a cling film against a sleeve and their impact on the light intensity level of dental light-emitting diode (LED) light-curing units (LCUs). Materials and methods: A sleeve and a cling film of proprietary brands were compared on their reduction of light output and bacterial colonies on agar plates. Including a control group, 120 samples of analog radiometer readings were obtained. A total of 90 samples, including 10 each for positive and negative controls, were obtained in a laboratory setting via swabbing of light-guiding tips placed intraorally. These swabbings were inoculated on 5% sheep blood agar in a biological cabinet and cultured for 48 hours at 37°C; the inoculated surfaces were photographed and analyzed for area of coverage by bacterial colonies. The data obtained were subjected to ANOVA and Mann–Whitney U tests. Results: There is neither statistically significant reduction in output nor difference in output between either barriers (p > 0.05). There is statistically significant reduction in bacterial colonies on the inoculated surface by both barriers compared to no barrier (p < 0.01), but there is no statistically significant difference between the two barriers (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Both barriers do not significantly affect light output and are equally efficacious as cross-contamination barriers, and the choice lies with the operator. Clinical significance: Use of barriers is very important to prevent cross-infection control. The results of our study help the clinician select appropriate measures to prevent cross infection while using LCUs across the patients.


PDF Share
  1. Rutala WA, Weber DJ, the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities; 2008. p. 28.
  2. Kohn WG, Collins AS, Cleveland JL, et al. Guidelines for infection control in dental health-care settings—2003. MMWR Recomm Rep 2003 Dec;52(RR-17):1–61.
  3. Al-Marzok MI. The effect of wrapping of light-cure tips on the cure of composite resin. Eur J Gen Dent 2012 Sep;1(3):183–186. DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.105384.
  4. Brokos I, Turner S, Santini A. The Effect of Disposable Infection Control Sleeves on the Total Energy Delivered by Dental LCUs. Prim Dent J 2012 Oct;1(1):11–16. DOI: 10.1308/205016812803838438.
  5. Chong SL, Lam YK, Lee FK, et al. Effect of Various Infection-Control Methods for Light-Cure Units on the Cure of Composite Resins. Oper Dent 1998;23(3):150–154.
  6. Hodson NA, Dunne SM, Pankhurst CL. The Effect of Infection-Control Barriers on the Light Intensity of Light-Cure Units and Depth of Cure of Composite. Prim Dent Care 2005;12(2):61–67. DOI: 10.1308/1355761053695149.
  7. McAndrew R, Lynch CD, Pavli M, et al. The effect of disposable infection control barriers and physical damage on the power output of light curing units and light curing tips. Br Dent J 2011 Apr;210(8): E12. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.312.
  8. Pollington S, Kahakachchi N, van Noort R. The Influence of Plastic Light Cure Sheaths on the Hardness of Resin Composite. Oper Dent 2009;34(6):741–745. DOI: 10.2341/09-024-L.
  9. Scott BA, Felix CA, Price RB. Effect of Disposable Infection Control Barriers on Light Output from Dental Curing Lights. J Can Dent Assoc 2004;70(2):105–110.
  10. Sword RJ, Do UN, Chang JH, et al. Effect of Curing Light Barriers and Light Types on Radiant Exposure and Composite Conversion. J Esthet Restor Dent 2016;28(1):29–42. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12173.
  11. Porter SJ, Porter K, Sammons R. Efficacy of cling film for barrier protection in a dental clinical environment: short communication. J Infect Prev 2011 Mar;12(2):60–63. DOI: 10.1177/1757177410392095.
  12. Janoowalla Z, Porter K, Shortall AC, et al. Microbial contamination of light curing units: a pilot study. J Infect Prev 2010 Nov;11(6):217–221. DOI: 10.1177/1757177410385488.
  13. Hwang IN, Hong SO, Lee BN, et al. Effect of a multi-layer infection control barrier on the micro-hardness of a composite resin. J Appl Oral Sci 2012 Sep–Oct;20(5):576–580. DOI: 10.1590/S1678-77572012000500014.
  14. Mitton BA, Wilson NH. The use and maintenance of visible light. Br Dent J 2001;191(2):82–96. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4801103.
  15. Price RB, Shortall AC, Palin WM. Contemporary Issues in Light Curing. Oper Dent 2014;39(1):4–14. DOI: 10.2341/13-067-LIT.
  16. AlShaafi MM. Effects of different infection control methods on the intensity output of LED Light-Curing Units: King Saud University. J Dent Sci 2012;4:27–31.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.