Next Article in Journal
Severity of Fatigue and Its Relationship with TSH before and after Levothyroxine Replacement Therapy in Patients with Primary Hypothyroidism
Next Article in Special Issue
Bidirectional Relationship between Glycemic Control and COVID-19 and Perspectives of Islet Organoid Models of SARS-CoV-2 Infection
Previous Article in Journal
Inhibition of Microglial GSK3β Activity Is Common to Different Kinds of Antidepressants: A Proposal for an In Vitro Screen to Detect Novel Antidepressant Principles
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mechanisms, Effects, and Management of Neurological Complications of Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 (NC-PASC)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Biomedicines
Volume 11
Issue 3
10.3390/biomedicines11030808
biomedicines-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Current SARS-CoV-2 Protective Strategies for Healthcare Professionals

by
Miriam Ting
1,*,
John A. Molinari
2 and
Jon B. Suzuki
3,4,5,6,7
1
Department of Periodontics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
2
School of Dentistry, University of Detroit Mercy, Detroit, MI 48221, USA
3
Department of Graduate Periodontics, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 20742, USA
4
Department of Graduate Prosthodontics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
5
Department of Graduate Periodontics, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314, USA
6
Department of Microbiology and Immunology (Medicine), Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA
7
Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology (Dentistry), Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Biomedicines 2023, 11(3), 808; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11030808
Submission received: 21 December 2022 / Revised: 12 February 2023 / Accepted: 24 February 2023 / Published: 7 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Emerging Trends in Pathophysiology and Therapy of COVID-19)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 was first reported in China in December 2019. SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious and spread primarily via an airborne route. Hand hygiene, surgical masks, vaccinations and boosters, air filtration, environmental sanitization, instrument sterilization, mouth rinses, and social distancing are essential infection control measures against the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. This paper aims to provide healthcare professionals with evidence-based protective strategies.

1. Introduction

Starting in December 2019, a large number of people were hospitalized with severe pneumonia in Wuhan, China [1]. The etiologic agent was unlike any previously known pathogen. In January 2020, pharyngeal and respiratory swabs from these hospitalized patients revealed a new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. By March 2020, there were 98,192 confirmed cases of COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 2% [2]. On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic [3].
The routes for disease transmission from an infected SARS-CoV-2 person include contact with infected body fluids, contaminated surfaces or instruments, and airborne infectious particles [4]. Demonstration of an airborne route of viral transmission also had a significant impact on infection control in healthcare settings by emphasizing preventive practices against microbial aerosols. The potential for airborne microbial infection was already recognized before the discovery of specific infectious agents such as bacteria and viruses. Historical accounts of pneumonic plague reported the spread to non-infected patients who were not in direct contact. Apparently, the inhalation of the bacteria Yersinia pestis resulted in universally fatal bacterial infection [5]. In 1996, a publication reported that aerosolized Mycobacterium tuberculosis from a patient with active tuberculosis (TB) entered an airplane’s ventilation system and infected other passengers [6]. Measles virus, which is one of the most infectious respiratory pathogens, is also spread by virus-laden aerosols, has also been reported to spread infection to susceptible children through the ventilation system [7].
The oral cavity is one of the portals for SARS-CoV-2 entry and viral transmission. The health of the oral cavity may influence the transmissibility of the virus. Good oral health and meticulous oral hygiene may reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or transmission [8,9].

2. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

At the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, many medical and dental clinics were forced to reduce patient access by limiting clinical activity to urgent care only. Overcrowding, an insufficient availability of respirators, inconsistent airborne infection control, and an inability to constantly sterilize contaminated environments were shown to contribute to infection caused by coronaviruses responsible for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) [10,11,12,13,14]. Person-to-person cross-infection can occur through contact with infected COVID-19 patients via respiratory droplets from coughing or sneezing [15]. In addition, inhalation of infectious micro-droplets through the nose, mouth, as well as contact with SARS-CoV-2 through eyes could also result in the onset of COVID-19 disease [16].
Droplets or splatter are airborne particles of diameter greater than 50 μm. These particles eject forcefully from the operative area but are too heavy to be suspended in the air for an extended time and are only airborne briefly [17]. In contrast, aerosols are micro-droplet particles with diameters far less than 50 μm. These particles are small enough to stay airborne for an extended periods before contaminating environmental surfaces or being inhaled. Particles less than 5 μm are reported to be suspended in closed environment for longer periods of time [18]. For particles between 5–10 μm in size the suspension remains variable and is contingent upon room temperature, airflow, transient personnel, etc. [19]. Particles greater than 10 μm more quickly settle onto the floor or inanimate surfaces [19]. Smaller aerosol particles of diameter 0.5–10 μm can penetrate further in the respiratory tract and have the greatest potential for viral transmission [20,21,22].
The composition of an aerosol depends on the patient and procedures performed. It is mostly comprised of saliva, nasal and pharyngeal secretions, blood, bacteria and viruses suspended in these secretions [20].
The inability for physical distancing of clinicians and patients in an overcrowded settings have been demonstrated to result in higher rates of COVID-19 infection in hemodialysis rooms [23]. This information may be applied to other clinical settings with reference to physical distancing.
In the medical and dental facilities, high concentrations of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 can increase occupational airborne infection risks. In the hospital, aerosol-generating procedures (AGP) include intubation, bronchoscopy, cardiopulmonary resuscitation or use of the nebulizer [24,25,26]. Table 1 summarizes medical procedures generating aerosols.
Increased aerosols were detected before and after intubation [27]. There were higher rates of infection in healthcare providers involved in intubation compared to controls [28]. The risk of infected aerosols exposure was highest among healthcare providers during the peri-intubation period [28]. Other data suggest a low rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in anesthetists and intensivists performing endotracheal intubation [29]. More effective personal protective equipment during intubation may influence the risk during intubation.
Extubation may present more opportunities for aerosolization. Extubation may trigger forceful coughing. The removal of the endotracheal tube during high air flows may cause aerosolization of the secretions in the tube.
During the SARS epidemic, tracheostomy insertion showed an increased transmission risk to healthcare providers compared to controls [30]. The process often involved bronchoscopy guidance which could create a leak from the ventilation circuit distal to the microbial filters. This would most probably cause aerosol generation. Disconnecting the endotracheal tube from the tracheostomy may also generate aerosol. Tracheostomy removal or change usually involves suctioning, which will cause forceful coughing. This may generate aerosolized particles from upper airways and the tracheostomy site.
Data from air sampling studies on aerosolization during bronchoscopy were contradictory [31]. One study reported that bronchoscopy without nebulized medication did not generate more aerosols [32]. But another bronchoscopy study focusing on influenza Ribonucleic acid (RNA) detected increased RNA-containing aerosols [27]. Thus, treating bronchoscopy as an aerosol-generating procedure remains a precaution.
During use of high flow nasal oxygen devices, mouth opening allows flow to be diverted out of the oral cavity, generating aerosol from the nasal passages and upper airways [33]. The use of surgical face masks in conjunction with high-flow nasal oxygen can significantly reduce the dispersion of bioaerosols and may be a risk reduction strategy [33].
The suctioning of intubated patients and the disconnection of the ventilator is a source of aerosolization. This risk from airway suctioning is associated with healthcare worker infection rates during the SARS epidemic [31].
Nebulization can increase aerosol particle detection. These particles were generated from the nebulizer and not the patient. They should not, therefore, pose an infection risk. However, as a precautionary measure, sputum induction with nebulized saline is managed as an aerosol-producing procedure.
Prolonged and forceful coughing may generate aerosols. Nasogastric tube insertion [34] and swallow assessment [35] often induces forceful coughing and should be considered aerosol-generating procedures.
Dental aerosols may also include tooth shards and any materials used in the dental procedure such as abrasives used for air polishing [20,36]. Aerosols generated during dental procedures may remain suspended in the air for several hours and can spread up to 3 m from the source. Dental equipment-generated aerosolized particles may present as aerosol, droplets or splatter (0.001 to 50 µm) [37].
In the dental office, AGP include use of high-speed handpieces and other rotary instruments, ultrasonic instruments with water cooling systems, and air-water spray syringes [38]. Visible and non-visible droplets of water, blood, saliva, bacteria and viruses are created by these instruments [39]. Dental professionals are particularly at risk due to the inability to maintain adequate interpersonal distance during dental procedures that contact blood and saliva. Dental procedures have been shown to produce microbial-laden aerosols [39]. Table 2 summarizes dental devices and procedures that produce aerosols.
Coronaviruses have been detected in sputum, nasopharyngeal secretions, bronchoalveolar lavages, urine, tears, feces, conjunctival secretions, blood and lung tissues [40,41,42,43]. These coronaviruses can survive in sputum, serum, and feces for at least 96 h, in urine for 72 h [44], on surfaces for up to 9 days [45]. As mentioned above, SARS-CoV-2 can also survive outside the living cell, in droplets, aerosols and on surfaces; viability in aerosols can last for up to 3 h and can survive on stainless steel and plastics for up to 72 h [46].
Measles, SARS-CoV-2, and other airborne viruses in aerosol can be difficult to contain in clinical environments. Therefore, infection control strategies need to be adequately broad to encompass all transmission modes. SARS-CoV-2 is more contagious in symptomatic patients but can spread from human to human even in asymptomatic patients or patients with mild symptoms [47].

3. Pre-Appointment Screening

Telephone surveys of patients before their medical or dental appointments could aid in recognizing infected COVID-19 patients before they arrive at the dental practice. Telephone survey questionnaires may include body temperature, COVID-19 symptoms, contact with COVID-19 infected persons, and vaccination status. Patients with body temperatures greater than 37.5 degrees Celsius should proceed with caution.

4. Pre-Appointment Mouth Rinsing

Studies conducted during the early months of the pandemic demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 was consistently detected in the saliva of 92% of COVID-19 positive patients [48]. As a result, the pandemic sparked research as to the antiviral properties of multiple mouthwash formulations [49], and the use of a pre-procedural mouth rinse has been suggested [50]. Previously, antimicrobial mouthwashes have been traditionally used to reduce oral bacteria, with a preprocedural mouthwash reported to be most effective in reducing the bacterial load in oral aerosols [51,52].
Historically, pre-procedural rinses were reported to be effective against several infectious viruses, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), herpes simplex virus (HSV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) [50]. Commercial mouthwashes include active ingredients such as chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX), cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC), povidone iodine or polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine (PVP-I), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), stabilized hypochlorous acid, dipotassium oxalate, zinc fluoride, sodium fluoride, eucalyptol, thymol, and menthol [53].
With reference to the strong in vitro sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 to oxidizing agents, some studies suggested the use of 1% H2O2 for 30 s to reduce salivary viruses in vivo [54,55]. On the contrary, in vitro studies on H2O2, CPC, CHX, and PVP-I concluded that PVP-I at 0.5–1.5% or CPC should be preferred over H2O2 or CHX [49]. Some studies reported that mouthwashes containing CHX were not effective against SARS-CoV-2 [54,55]. However, the interaction of the mouthwash with oral environment and the rinsing effect of the mouthwash in the oral cavity may have differing in vivo effects compared to in-vitro.
In a clinical study of non-hospitalized patients with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 0.07% CPC mouthwash compared to placebo was associated with a significant increase in lysed SARS-CoV-2 [56]. Another clinical study reported that both CPC plus zinc mouthwash and CHX mouthwash significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 viral load for up to 60 min after rinsing, and H2O2 significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 for up to 30 min [57]. Clinically, all four mouthwashes (saline, 1% H2O2, 0.12% CHX, or 0.5% PVP-I) decreased viral load by 61–89% at 15 min and by 70–97% at 45 min [58]. The antiviral activity of mouthwashes may depend on the sensitivity of the SARS-CoV-2 lipid envelop to surfactant properties of the mouthwash disrupting the viral membrane. The surfactant disruption of the viral membrane is virucidal despite viral mutations [59].

5. Hand Hygiene

One component singled out for special mention in the “clean it first” category is hand hygiene. All infection control recommendations and guidelines stress the importance and clinical impact of this practice. Hand hygiene is the most important procedure for minimizing the potential for development of nosocomial infections [60,61,62,63,64,65]. Its primary purpose is the mechanical removal of transient microorganisms from the skin, preventing cross-contamination and cross-infection from contaminated hands.
The most frequently used classes of antimicrobial antiseptics currently available are CHX, parachlorometaxylenol, and triclosan. Each is capable of providing substantivity, a residual antimicrobial effect, after each succeeding handwash procedure during the day. The CDC is now recommending alcohol-based hand products (i.e., preparations containing 60% to 95% alcohol) as an option for routine use and not just when soap and water are unavailable. Alcohol-based hand-rubs have been used extensively for years in Europe. In the United States, their use was limited to situations in which soap and water were unavailable. Alcohol-based hand-rubs have been proven effective, and they may help improve adherence to hand-hygiene protocols in many healthcare settings. The 2002 CDC hand-hygiene guideline states that alcohol-based hand sanitizers can significantly reduce microorganisms on skin. These hand sanitizers are fast acting and cause less skin irritation. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers for use in healthcare settings are available as low-viscosity gels, rinses, and foams [65].
Proper hand hygiene and care are commonly overlooked asepsis areas for healthcare workers (HCWs). With regards to routine, nonsurgical dental or medical procedures, hand hygiene is mandatory before treatment; between patient appointments; after glove removal; before re-gloving after removing gloves that are cut, torn, or punctured; and before leaving treatment areas.
For surgical procedures, a more rigorous procedure is recommended using a scrub technique to clean nails, hands, and forearms with a surgical antiseptic and a soft sterile brush or sponge. The HCWs should lather for 2 to 6 min using multiple scrub and rinse cycles and dry with sterile towels before donning sterile surgical gloves [62,63,65].
Although routine handwashing is a fundamental application of aseptic technique, it can also be a frequent source of dermatitis or exudative problems, which can have immunologic or nonspecific irritant causes. HCWs who have exudative lesions or weeping dermatitis should refrain from direct patient contact until the condition is resolved. [66] They can also take steps to return damaged skin to epithelial integrity by ceasing to use antiseptics that remove skin oils and replace them with a non-antiseptic, mechanical cleansing agent, such as liquid soap and water.
Dryness resulting from frequent handwashing can be relieved by hand lotions which can prevent dermatitis resulting from glove use. Petroleum-based lotion formulations can weaken latex gloves and cause increased permeability. Lotions that contain petroleum or other oil emollients may affect the integrity of gloves and should not be used. At the time of product selection, information should be obtained from the manufacturer regarding interaction between gloves and lotions [63,65].

6. Personal Protective Equipment

Since SAR-CoV-2 transmission can occur via direct or indirect contact on the ocular, oral or nasal mucosa with infected body fluids, droplet or aerosol. Healthcare providers need to consider these transmission routes and protect themselves with disposable personal protective equipment (PPE) [67]. PPE recommendations include the use of face shields or protective glasses, fully body disposable gowns, respirators or masks, and gloves. Hand sanitization is a must before and during the donning of PPE.
SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted through ocular mucous membranes via infectious particles contacting the conjunctival epithelium [67]. Thus, during medical and dental procedures, protective eyewear or a face shield should be used during patient treatment and disinfected after every patient.
Respiratory protection provided by masks or higher-level respirators should always be used for patient care procedures. Aerosol-producing procedures require masks with higher filtration such as a particulate respirator with National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-certified N95, European Standard Filtering Face Piece 2 (EU FFP2), or an equivalent. In an emergency involving a suspected COVID-19 patient, an even higher level of respiratory protection such as the respirators conforming to European Standard 149 (EN149) may be required [67]. In addition, fit testing and seal checks are needed to ensure respirator effectiveness.
In addition, inpatients and outpatients in the medical or dental facilities should be required always to wear face masks.

7. Removal of Contaminated Air

Contaminated air in treatment operatories can be removed with use of high-volume evacuators (HVE) or, more expensively, with use of high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters. HEPA filtration devices can remove 99.97% of the particles measuring 0.3 μm in diameter. HVE can also remove 90% of contaminated air from the operating site if held 6–15 mm from the aerosol-producing area [68]. HVE remove large volumes of air in a short amount of time. Some hospital high vacuums do not remove large volumes of air and may not be consider HVE. The high vacuum used in dentistry has an opening of at least 8 mm and can remove large volumes of air up to 100 cubic feet of air per minute [39]. However, an assistant or a modification of the HVE may be required to maintain an effective evacuating distance.
The management of potentially contaminate aerosols are best controlled by evacuation procedures using suction devices in the hospital examination rooms. In addition, opening doors and windows may be an effective management for aerosol transmission regardless of the humidity [69].
In the ICU, the respiratory equipment for patients must be protected with a high efficiency filter (e.g., BS EN 13328-1) [70], which is disposed after each use. A closed suctioning system is recommended.
In operating rooms, laminar flow ventilation should remain on during all surgical procedures. For patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, aerosol-generating procedures should be conducted when essential.
Dental procedures utilizing an assistant and HVE can more effectively reduce the number of colony forming units (CFU) airborne during dental procedures [20]. Incorporation of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation incorporated in HEPA filtration units is also a choice to disinfect environmental air; but can also be expensive.

8. Environmental Surface Disinfection

SARS Cov-2 virus survives on inanimate surfaces, thus demonstrating the aerosol viability of the COVID-19 virus. The issue of inanimate surfaces including plastic and stainless steel are especially significant in medical and dental environments, but also applicable for everyday living. Using culture techniques, SARS CoV-2 has been reported to survive on plastic surfaces up to 72 h, and reported to survive on stainless steel surfaces for up to 48 h. Therefore, preventive strategies for surface disinfection for SARS CoV-2 is significant for the reduction of the risk of virus transmission [71].
During patient encounters, fluids having infectious pathogens could contaminate surrounding surfaces. The decontamination of these operatory treatment surfaces between patient appointments constitutes an important component of an effective IC program [72,73]. The routine use of chemical disinfectants or disposable barriers or both is warranted in certain instances because it is not possible, or necessary, to sterilize all contaminated items or surfaces.
Many commercial products are available for use as surface disinfectants. Some of these are capable of surface cleaning and disinfection, some only disinfect, and some have an unpleasant odor, whereas others stain or bleach surfaces. It is essential that before a surface disinfectant is purchased for routine use, medical and dental professionals obtain as much information as possible. This will allow subsequent decisions to be based on appropriate efficacy criteria and reduce the potential for product misuse. Certain products can be used for both surface cleaning and effective environmental surface disinfection, whereas others are useful disinfectants but require initial surface cleaning with another water-based solution.
Social distancing, vaccinations and boosters, air filtration, efficient environmental sanitization, instrument sterilization, and informed use of PPE can significantly reduce the transmission risks. With a better understanding of how SARS-CoV-2 can survive and spread, healthcare providers can better protect themselves and their patients.

9. Prevention of Airborne Transmission of Viruses

Single rooms of isolation areas should be appointed for patients with possible or confirmed COVID-19. Single rooms should also be reserved for aerosol-generating procedures. In situations where single rooms are unavailable, suspected COVID-19 patients may be cohorted in a well-ventilated room, and face masks offered to patients. Physical separation to reduce airborne transmission in the hospital setting may include spatial barriers using glass or plastic partitions to manage patients in triage areas and hospital reception areas, as well as curtains around each bed in inpatient wards.
Particle size and airborne infectivity is primarily responsible for COVID transmission between individuals. However, difficulty in controlling environmental variables has been proven to make the interpretation of risk factors difficult. Sampling difficulties such as humidity, wind, temperature, and other environmental issues make interpretation of data inconclusive. In addition, smaller droplets evaporate faster to expose SARS-CoV-2 virions in the environment; this may reduce the viability of the virus.
Other reasons for reduced emphasis on airborne transmission could be that the smaller droplets have a smaller number of viruses as compared to larger droplets. Furthermore, these small droplets containing SARS-CoV-2 might also physically combine with or attach to pre-existing particulate matter so that their behavior and fate may be governed by the particulate matter composition. Thus, the measurement of their infectivity and viability is highly uncertain due to a lack of a robust sampling system to separately collect virions in the atmosphere [74,75,76].

10. Vaccination

The effectiveness of vaccines to control and greatly limit the spread of many human infectious diseases, such as polio, diphtheria, measles, rubella, and tetanus, is regarded as one of the major public health achievements of the 20th century. Vaccinations and boosters can reduce transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated population [77]. This is one strategy for healthcare professionals to reduce their risk of COVID-19 infection.
Data currently show that the mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 may not have the longevity and widespread protection against Omicron variants as previously expected. Currently, the following subvariant XBB.1.5, BQ.1.1 and BQ.1 are circulating. Updated bivalent COVID-19 vaccine and booster may protect against the omicron variants and the other COVID variants. The booster dose rate may need to increase to protect against severe complications, hospitalization and death. Therefore, further longitudinal clinical observations are necessary to determine the long-term efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.
Thus, the vaccine could reduce COVID-19 symptoms in those vaccinated. The vaccine might reduce but not eliminate the risk of morbidity or mortality of COVID-19.

11. Guidance for Health Care Settings

Current guidelines by the centers for disease control indicate that asymptomatic health care workers who have had higher exposure risks do not require previous work restrictions, despite previous vaccinations or COVID infections [78]. Asymptomatic health care workers must not have active symptoms or test positive for SARS-CoV-2.
Testing frequency may need to be increased to identify variants and potential non-identified variants; this includes variants with shortened incubation periods. In addition, the risk for false negative antigen tests in patients without symptoms should be addressed. Screening of asymptomatic healthcare providers is at the discretion of the director of the health care facility [78].

12. Conclusions

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurs via aerosols, droplets, and direct contact. The airborne nature of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 can put healthcare providers at a higher risk of infection. Aerosol generation in the healthcare facility can increase the risk of airborne transmission. Aerosols may have viable viruses including SARS-CoV-2. Prolonged suspension of virus-containing aerosols in the environment can carry a risk of airborne transmission for an extended duration. Aerosolized viruses will also be deposited over a larger area. Careful screening of patients via a telephone survey can help screen out COVID-19 patients before the office appointment. Rapid SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests can also be used to identify symptomatic or asymptomatic patients.
Social distancing, vaccinations and boosters, air filtration, efficient environmental sanitization, instrument sterilization, and informed use of PPE can significantly reduce the transmission risks. Contaminated air can be removed by HVE and HEPA filters. Tracking infection rates among healthcare providers and correlating it to PPE usage can identify areas where PPE may be inadequate and need reinforcement. To help guide appropriate infection control strategies, further air sampling studies are needed to understand the transmission risk of aerosol-producing procedures. With a better understanding of how SARS-CoV-2 can survive and spread, healthcare providers can better protect themselves and their patients.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.A.M., M.T. and J.B.S.; resources, J.A.M., M.T. and J.B.S.; data curation, M.T.; writing—original draft preparation, J.A.M. and M.T.; writing—review and editing, M.T. and J.B.S.; visualization, J.A.M. and M.T.; supervision, M.T.; project administration, M.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chan, J.F.; Yuan, S.; Kok, K.H.; To, K.K.; Chu, H.; Yang, J.; Xing, F.; Liu, J.; Yip, C.C.; Poon, R.W.; et al. A familial cluster of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person-to-person transmission: A study of a family cluster. Lancet 2020, 395, 514–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Ng, M.-Y.; Lee, E.Y.; Yang, J.; Yang, F.; Li, X.; Wang, H.; Lui, M.M.-S.; Lo, C.S.-Y.; Leung, B.; Khong, P.-L.; et al. Imaging Profile of the COVID-19 Infection: Radiologic Findings and Literature Review. Radiol. Cardiothorac. Imaging 2020, 2, e200034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Sohrabi, C.; Alsafi, Z.; O’Neill, N.; Khan, M.; Kerwan, A.; Al-Jabir, A.; Iosifidis, C.; Agha, R. World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Int. J. Surg. 2020, 76, 71–76. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  4. Garner, J.S. Guideline for isolation precautions in hospitals. The Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 1996, 17, 53–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gottfried, R.S. The Black Death: Natural and Human Disaster in Medieval Europe; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1983; pp. 7–10. [Google Scholar]
  6. Kenyon, T.A.; Valway, S.E.; Ihle, W.W.; Onorato, I.M.; Castro, K.G. Transmission of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis during a long airplane flight. N. Engl. J. Med. 1996, 334, 933–938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bloch, A.B.; Orenstein, W.A.; Ewing, W.M.; Spain, W.H.; Mallison, G.F.; Herrmann, K.L.; Hinman, A.R. Measles outbreak in a pediatric practice: Airborne transmission in an office setting. Pediatrics 1985, 75, 676–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Ting, M.; Suzuki, J.B. SARS-CoV-2: Overview and Its Impact on Oral Health. Biomedicines 2021, 9, 1690. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  9. Ting, M.; Suzuki, J.B. COVID-19: Current Overview on SARS-CoV-2 and the Dental Implications. Oral Health. July 2022. Available online: https://www.oralhealthgroup.com/features/covid-19-current-overview-on-sars-cov-2-and-the-dental-implications/ (accessed on 1 December 2022).
  10. McDonald, L.C.; Simor, A.E.; Su, I.-J.; Maloney, S.; Ofner, M.; Chen, K.-T.; Lando, J.F.; McGeer, A.; Lee, M.-L.; Jernigan, D.B. SARS in Healthcare Facilities, Toronto and Taiwan. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2004, 10, 777–781. [Google Scholar]
  11. Park, H.Y.; Lee, E.J.; Ryu, Y.W.; Kim, Y.; Kim, H.; Lee, H.; Yi, S.J. Epidemiological investigation of MERS-CoV spread in a single hospital in South Korea, May to June 2015. Euro Surveill. 2015, 20, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Fagbo, S.; Skakni, L.; Chu, D.K.W.; Garbati, M.; Joseph, M.; Peiris, M.; Hakawi, A.M. Molecular Epidemiology of Hospital Outbreak of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 2014. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2015, 21, 1981–1988. [Google Scholar]
  13. Assiri, A.; McGeer, A.; Perl, T.M.; Price, C.S.; Al Rabeeah, A.A.; Cummings, D.A.; Alabdullatif, Z.N.; Assad, M.; Almulhim, A.; Makhdoom, H.; et al. Hospital Outbreak of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013, 369, 407–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Guery, B.; Poissy, J.; el Mansouf, L.; Séjourné, C.; Ettahar, N.; Lemaire, X.; Vuotto, F.; Goffard, A.; Behillil, S.; Enouf, V.; et al. Clinical features and viral diagnosis of two cases of infection with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus: A report of nosocomial transmission. Lancet 2013, 381, 2265–2272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Li, P.; Fu, J.-B.; Li, K.-F.; Liu, J.-N.; Wang, H.-L.; Liu, L.-J.; Chen, Y.; Zhang, Y.-L.; Liu, S.-L.; Tang, A.; et al. Transmission of COVID-19 in the terminal stages of the incubation period: A familial cluster. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2020, 96, 452–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhu, N.; Zhang, D.; Wang, W.; Li, X.; Yang, B.; Song, J.; Zhao, X.; Huang, B.; Shi, W.; Lu, R.; et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 727–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Miller, R.L.; Micik, R.E.; Abel, C.; Ryge, G. Studies on Dental Aerobiology: II. Microbial Splatter Discharged from the Oral Cavity of Dental Patients. J. Dent. Res. 1971, 50, 621–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Tellier, R. Review of Aerosol Transmission of Influenza A Virus. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2006, 12, 1657–1662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Kohanski, M.A.; Lo, L.J.; Waring, M.S. Review of indoor aerosol generation, transport, and control in the context of COVID-19. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2020, 10, 1173–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Micik, R.E.; Miller, R.L.; Mazzarella, M.A.; Ryge, G. Studies on Dental Aerobiology: I. Bacterial Aerosols Generated during Dental Procedures. J. Dent. Res. 1969, 48, 49–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Micik, R.E.; Miller, R.L.; Leong, A.C. Studies on Dental Aerobiology: III. Efficacy of Surgical Masks in Protecting Dental Personnel from Airborne Bacterial Particles. J. Dent. Res. 1971, 50, 626–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Miller, R.L.; Micik, R.E. Air pollution and its control in the dental office. Dent. Clin. N. Am. 1978, 22, 453–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Beaubien-Souligny, W.; Nadeau-Fredette, A.-C.; Nguyen, M.-N.; Rios, N.; Caron, M.-L.; Tom, A.; Suri, R.S. Infection control measures to prevent outbreaks of COVID-19 in Quebec hemodialysis units: A cross-sectional survey. CMAJ Open 2021, 9, E1232–E1241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Varia, M.; Wilson, S.; Sarwal, S.; McGeer, A.; Gournis, E.; Galanis, E.; Henry, B.; Team, H.O.I. Investigation of a nosocomial outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Toronto, Canada. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 2003, 169, 285–292. [Google Scholar]
  25. Lee, N.; Hui, D.; Wu, A.; Chan, P.; Cameron, P.; Joynt, G.M.; Ahuja, A.; Yung, M.Y.; Leung, C.; To, K.; et al. A Major Outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome in Hong Kong. N. Engl. J. Med. 2003, 348, 1986–1994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Christian, M.D.; Loutfy, M.; McDonald, L.C.; Martinez, K.F.; Ofner, M.; Wong, T.; Wallington, T.; Gold, W.L.; Mederski, B.; Green, K.; et al. Possible SARS Coronavirus Transmission during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2004, 10, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Thompson, K.-A.; Pappachan, J.V.; Bennett, A.M.; Mittal, H.; Macken, S.; Dove, B.K.; Nguyen-Van-Tam, J.S.; Copley, V.R.; O’Brien, S.; Hoffman, P.; et al. Influenza Aerosols in UK Hospitals during the H1N1 (2009) Pandemic–The Risk of Aerosol Generation during Medical Procedures. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e56278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Fowler, R.A.; Guest, C.B.; Lapinsky, S.E.; Sibbald, W.J.; Louie, M.; Tang, P.; Simor, A.E.; Stewart, T.E. Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome during Intubation and Mechanical Ventilation. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2004, 169, 1198–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Cook, T.M. Risk to health from COVID-19 for anaesthetists and intensivists—A narrative review. Anaesthesia 2020, 75, 1494–1508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tran, K.; Cimon, K.; Severn, M.; Pessoa-Silva, C.L.; Conly, J. Aerosol Generating Procedures and Risk of Transmission of Acute Respiratory Infections to Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e3579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. National Services Scotland. Supplementary Document 1, Assessing the Evidence Base for Medical Procedures Which May Create a Higher Risk of Respiratory Infection Transmission from Patient to Healthcare Worker. 2020. Available online: https://hpspubsrepo.blob.core.windows.net/hps-website/nss/3055/documents/2_agp-supplmentary-document.pdf (accessed on 11 September 2020).
  32. O’Neil, C.A.; Li, J.; Leavey, A.; Wang, Y.; Hink, M.; Wallace, M.; Biswas, P.; Burnham, C.-A.D.; Babcock, H.M.; for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epicenters Program. Characterization of Aerosols Generated During Patient Care Activities. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2017, 65, 1342–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kotoda, M.; Hishiyama, S.; Mitsui, K.; Tanikawa, T.; Morikawa, S.; Takamino, A.; Matsukawa, T. Assessment of the potential for pathogen dispersal during high-flow nasal therapy. J. Hosp. Infect. 2020, 104, 534–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland. Delivering the Emergency General Surgery Service in the UK during the Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic. 2020. Available online: https://www.asgbi.org.uk/userfiles/file/news/asgbi-statement-the-delivery-of-emergency-general-surgery-and-covid-19.pdf (accessed on 16 September 2020).
  35. Bolton, L.; Mills, C.; Wallace, S.; Brady, M.C. Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) COVID-19 Advisory Group. Aerosol generating procedures, dysphagia assessment and COVID-19: A rapid review. Int. J. Lang Commun. Disord. 2020, 55, 629–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Logothetis, D.D.; Gross, K.B.; Eberhart, A.; Drisko, C. Bacterial airborne contamination with an air-polishing device. Gen. Dent. 1988, 36, 496–499. [Google Scholar]
  37. Veena, H.; Mahantesha, S.; Joseph, P.A.; Patil, S.R.; Patil, S.H. Dissemination of aerosol and splatter during ultrasonic scaling: A pilot study. J. Infect. Public Health 2015, 8, 260–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Spagnuolo, G.; De Vito, D.; Rengo, S.; Tatullo, M. COVID-19 Outbreak: An Overview on Dentistry. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Harrel, S.K.; Molinari, J. Aerosols and splatter in dentistry: A brief review of the literature and infection control implications. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2004, 135, 429–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Cheng, V.C.C.; Lau, S.K.P.; Woo, P.C.Y.; Yuen, K.-Y. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus as an Agent of Emerging and Reemerging Infection. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2007, 20, 660–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  41. Chan, W.M.; Yuen, K.S.C.; Fan, D.S.P.; Lam, D.S.C.; Chan, P.; Sung, J.J.Y. Tears and conjunctival scrapings for coronavirus in patients with SARS. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2004, 88, 968–969. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Zumla, A.; Hui, D.S.; Perlman, S. Middle East respiratory syndrome. Lancet 2015, 386, 995–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Zhou, J.; Li, C.; Zhao, G.; Chu, H.; Wang, D.; Yan, H.H.-N.; Poon, V.K.-M.; Wen, L.; Wong, B.H.-Y.; Zhao, X.; et al. Human intestinal tract serves as an alternative infection route for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, eaao4966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Duan, S.-M.; Zhao, X.-S.; Wen, R.-F.; Huang, J.-J.; Pi, G.-H.; Zhang, S.-X.; Han, J.; Bi, S.; Ruan, L.; Dong, X.-P. Stability of SARS coronavirus in human specimens and environment and its sensitivity to heating and UV irradiation. Biomed. Environ. Sci. 2003, 16, 246–255. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kampf, G.; Todt, D.; Pfaender, S.; Steinmann, E. Persistence of coronaviruses on inanimate surfaces and their inactivation with biocidal agents. J. Hosp. Infect. 2020, 104, 246–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Van Doremalen, N.; Bushmaker, T.; Morris, D.H.; Holbrook, M.G.; Gamble, A.; Williamson, B.N.; Munster, V.J. Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 1564–1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Li, C.; Ji, F.; Wang, L.; Wang, L.; Hao, J.; Dai, M.; Gu, B. Asymptomatic and Human-to-Human Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in a 2-Family Cluster, Xuzhou, China. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2020, 26, 1626–1628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. To, K.K.-W.; Tsang, O.T.-Y.; Yip, C.C.-Y.; Chan, K.-H.; Wu, T.-C.; Chan, J.M.-C.; Leung, W.-S.; Chik, T.S.-H.; Choi, C.Y.-C.; Kandamby, D.H.; et al. Consistent Detection of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in Saliva. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 71, 841–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Ting, M.; Suzuki, J.B. The In Vitro Virucidal Effects of Mouthwashes on SARS-CoV-2. Int. J. Transl. Med. 2022, 2, 387–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wood, A.; Payne, D. The action of three antiseptics/disinfectants against enveloped and non-enveloped viruses. J. Hosp. Infect. 1998, 38, 283–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Samaranayake, L.P.; Peiris, M. Severe acute respiratory syndrome and dentistry: A retrospective view. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2004, 135, 1292–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Feres, M.; Figueiredo, L.C.; Faveri, M.; Stewart, B.; de Vizio, W. The Effectiveness of a Preprocedural Mouthrinse Containing Cetylpyridinium Chloride in Reducing Bacteria in the Dental Office. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2010, 141, 415–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Davies, K.; Buczkowski, H.; Welch, S.R.; Green, N.; Mawer, D.; Woodford, N.; Killip, M.J. Effective in vitro inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 by commercially available mouthwashes. J. Gen. Virol. 2021, 102, 001578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Lo Giudice, R. The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS CoV-2) in Dentistry. Management of Biological Risk in Dental Practice. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Peng, X.; Xu, X.; Li, Y.; Cheng, L.; Zhou, X.; Ren, B. Transmission routes of 2019-nCoV and controls in dental practice. Int. J. Oral Sci. 2020, 12, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Alemany, A.; Perez-Zsolt, D.; Raïch-Regué, D.; Muñoz-Basagoiti, J.; Ouchi, D.; Laporte-Villar, C.; Mitjà, O. Cetylpyridinium Chloride Mouthwash to Reduce Shedding of Infectious SARS-CoV-2: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial. J. Dent. Res. 2022, 101, 1450–1456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. de Paula Eduardo, F.; Corrêa, L.; Heller, D.; Daep, C.A.; Benitez, C.; Malheiros, Z.; Stewart, B.; Ryan, M.; Machado, C.M.; Hamerschlak, N.; et al. Salivary SARS-CoV-2 load reduction with mouthwash use: A randomized pilot clinical trial. Heliyon 2021, 7, e07346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Chaudhary, P.; Melkonyan, A.; Meethil, A.; Saraswat, S.; Hall, D.L.; Cottle, J.; Wenzel, M.; Ayouty, N.; Bense, S.; Casanova, F.; et al. Estimating salivary carriage of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in nonsymptomatic people and efficacy of mouthrinse in reducing viral load: A randomized controlled trial. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2021, 152, 903–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Saud, Z.; Tyrrell, V.J.; Zaragkoulias, A.; Protty, M.B.; Statkute, E.; Rubina, A.; Bentley, K.; White, D.A.; Rodrigues, P.D.S.; Murphy, R.C.; et al. The SARS-CoV2 envelope differs from host cells, exposes procoagulant lipids, and is disrupted in vivo by oral rinses. J. Lipid Res. 2022, 63, 100208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. CDC. Recommended infection control practices for dentistry. Morb. Mortal Wkly Rpt. 1993, 42, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  61. CDC. Guidelines for infection control in dental health-care settings. Morb. Mortal Wkly Rpt. Recomm. Rep. 2003, 52, 1–61. [Google Scholar]
  62. Cottone, J.A.; Molinari, J.A. State-of-the-art infection control in dentistry. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 1991, 122, 33–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Larson, E. A causal link between handwashing and risk of infection? Examination of the evidence. Infect. Control 1988, 9, 28–36. [Google Scholar]
  64. Boyce, J.M.; Pittet, D.; Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory C, Force HSAIHHT. Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings. Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America/Association for Professionals in Infection Control/Infectious Diseases Society of America. MMWR Recomm. Rep. 2002, 51, 1–45. [Google Scholar]
  65. Andrews, N.; Cuny, E.; Molinari, J.A.; Harte, J.A. Antisepsis and hand hygiene. In Cottone’s Practical Infection Control in Dentistry, 3rd ed.; Molinari, J.A., Harte, J.A., Eds.; Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2010; pp. 123–140. [Google Scholar]
  66. Molinari, J.A.; Harte, J.A. Dental Services. In APIC Text of Infection Control and Epidemiology 2009, 3rd ed.; Chapter 50; Assn for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology: Washington, DC, USA, 2009; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  67. Lu, C.-W.; Liu, X.-F.; Jia, Z.-F. 2019-nCoV transmission through the ocular surface must not be ignored. Lancet 2020, 395, e39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Sreenath, G.; Narayana, T.; Mohanty, L.; Vidhyadhari, P. Role of preprocedural rinse and high volume evacuator in reducing bacterial contamination in bioaerosols. J. Oral Maxillofac. Pathol. 2016, 20, 59–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Takada, M.; Fukushima, T.; Ozawa, S.; Matsubara, S.; Suzuki, T.; Fukumoto, I.; Hanazawa, T.; Nagashima, T.; Uruma, R.; Otsuka, M.; et al. Infection control for COVID-19 in hospital examination room. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 18230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. COVID-19: Infection Prevention and Control Guidance. Available online: https://www.publichealth.hscni.net/sites/default/files/2020-10/COVID-19_Infection_prevention_and_control_guidance_complete.%203.2%20%2818_06_2020%29.pdf (accessed on 18 September 2020).
  71. Suman, R.; Javaid, M.; Haleem, A.; Vaishya, R.; Bahl, S.; Nandan, D. Sustainability of Coronavirus on Different Surfaces. J. Clin. Exp. Hepatol. 2020, 10, 386–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. CDC. Guidelines for environmental infection control in health-care facilities. Morb. Mortal Wkly Rpt. 2003, 52, 1–44. [Google Scholar]
  73. Molinari, J.A.; Harte, J.A. (Eds.) Environmental surface disinfection control: Disposable barriers and chemical disinfection. In Cottone’s Practical Infection Control in Dentistry, 3rd ed.; Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2010; pp. 171–184. [Google Scholar]
  74. Drahl, C. A Conversation with Jose-Luis Jimenez. ACS Central Sci. 2020, 6, 2118–2119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Morawska, L.; Milton, D.K. It Is Time to Address Airborne Transmission of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 71, 2311–2313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Zhang, R.; Li, Y.; Zhang, A.L.; Wang, Y.; Molina, M.J. Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 14857–14863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ting, M.; Suzuki, J.B. Is the COVID-19 Pandemic Over? The Current Status of Boosters, Immunosenescence, Long Haul COVID, and Systemic Complications. Int. J. Transl. Med. 2022, 2, 230–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Interim Guidance for Managing Healthcare Personnel with SARS-CoV-2 Infection or Exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/guidance-risk-assesment-hcp.html (accessed on 22 September 2022).
Table
Table 1. Medical procedures generating aerosols.
Table 1. Medical procedures generating aerosols.
Aerosol GenerationProcedures
Head and neckHigh-speed cutting, tracheal intubation and extubation, manual ventilation, suctioning of upper ear nose and throat airway, tracheotomy/tracheostomy procedures, sputum induction using nebulized saline
PulmonaryBronchoscopy, respiratory tract procedures, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen
GastrointestinalEndoscopy, colonoscopy
OrthopedicsHigh-speed cutting
Post-mortemHigh-speed cutting
Table
Table 2. Dental devices and procedures that produce airborne contamination.
Table 2. Dental devices and procedures that produce airborne contamination.
Dental DevicesProceduresAirborne Contamination
Ultrasonic and
piezoelectric scalers		Oral prophylaxis
Scaling and root planning		Greatest source of aerosolized contamination. HVE reduced aerosolized bacteria by almost 99%
Air polishingOral prophylaxis
Stain removal		Aerosolized bacterial counts were almost as high as ultrasonic scalers.
Suction devices reduced aerosolized bacteria by greater than 95%
Air-water syringeWashing away debris.
Air-drying tooth preparation		Bacterial counts aerosolized is almost as high as ultrasonic scalers. HVE reduced aerosolized bacteria by almost 99%
Air turbine handpieceTooth preparationCan be minimal if rubber dam is used
Air abrasionTooth preparationExtensive airborne contamination with abrasive particles, contamination with bacteria is unknown
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ting, M.; Molinari, J.A.; Suzuki, J.B. Current SARS-CoV-2 Protective Strategies for Healthcare Professionals. Biomedicines 2023, 11, 808. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11030808

AMA Style

Ting M, Molinari JA, Suzuki JB. Current SARS-CoV-2 Protective Strategies for Healthcare Professionals. Biomedicines. 2023; 11(3):808. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11030808

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ting, Miriam, John A. Molinari, and Jon B. Suzuki. 2023. "Current SARS-CoV-2 Protective Strategies for Healthcare Professionals" Biomedicines 11, no. 3: 808. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11030808

APA Style

Ting, M., Molinari, J. A., & Suzuki, J. B. (2023). Current SARS-CoV-2 Protective Strategies for Healthcare Professionals. Biomedicines, 11(3), 808. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11030808

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop