The effectiveness of disinfection protocols and different disinfectants on dental impressions submitted to the laboratory.

Abstract

Purpose: Disinfection is highly important in dentistry, to avoid cross contamination both between the laboratory and the clinic, and between dental personnel. This study compared the efficacy of disinfection done in the laboratory and clinic together with the different disinfectants used. Materials and Methods: Impressions were taken from each of the 14 participants- 7 using Blueprint 20+ alginate and 7 using Affinis monobody addition silicone. 3 impressions were taken from each participant with 2 week intervals between each one. Every impression was then divided into 3; each part was subjected to spraying MD520, Minuten spray disinfectant or no disinfection (control) respectively. TSA media was used for suspending dilutions and result was found in CFU/cm2

Results: MD520 seemed to be 100% effective with only a few microbial colonies growing below the detection limit, while Minuten turned out to leave higher levels of bacterial growth with the microbial load turning out to be almost twice as much for alginate then polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) impressions. In addition alginate carried significantly more bacteria compared to PVS before subjected to any disinfection. Conclusion: This study showed that unlike disinfection with MD520 some degree of bacterial growth still remains after the use of Minuten; therefore handling of impressions in all settings should be done with care. The use of both disinfectants in combination should also be considered.