HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 133, No 9, 1199-1206. © 2002 American Dental Association

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by DEPAOLA, L. G. Articles by BARTLETT, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by DEPAOLA, L. G. Articles by BARTLETT, J. Related Collections Infection Control

JADA Continuing Education

Background. The National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, or NIDCR; the American Dental Association, or ADA; and the Organization for Safety & Asepsis Procedures, or OSAP, sponsored a workshop on the topic of dental unit waterlines, or DUWLs, on Sept. 29, 2000, at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md. These organizations invited a group of experts from the ADA, NIDCR, OSAP, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Defense, academia and private industry to participate.

Types of Studies Reviewed. The sponsors asked the participants to critically review the scientific literature on the subject in an attempt to determine the evidence basis for management of DUWL contamination and potential health risks, if any, in dental procedures. The ultimate goal of the workshop was to determine if a research agenda in the area of DUWLs should be pursued and what questions such an agenda should involve.

Results. The workshop yielded four questions that need to be addressed in future research: What is the safest and most effective agent(s)/device(s) for achieving microbial levels of no more than 200 colony-forming units per milliliter, or CFU/mL, in the effluent dental water? How should these products be evaluated and by whom? What are the adverse health effects, if any, of chronic exposure to dental bioaerosol or to the agents introduced into the dental unit to treat the waterlines for both dental staff members and patients? How could these health issues be evaluated?

Clinical Implications. Developing evidence-based parameters for the management of biofilm contamination that are efficacious and cost-effective will allow clinicians to meet in proposed ADA standard of no more than 200 CFU/mL of effluent water.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Yabune, S. Imazato, and S. Ebisu Assessment of Inhibitory Effects of Fluoride-Coated Tubes on Biofilm Formation by Using the In Vitro Dental Unit Waterline Biofilm Model Appl. Envir. Microbiol., October 1, 2008; 74(19): 5958 - 5964. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]