0.5%次氯酸钠和2%戊二醛浸渍消毒剂对海藻酸盐印痕的抑菌效果

Eddy Dahar, J. Kaur
{"title":"0.5%次氯酸钠和2%戊二醛浸渍消毒剂对海藻酸盐印痕的抑菌效果","authors":"Eddy Dahar, J. Kaur","doi":"10.9790/0853-1606131114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dental impressions often carry microorganisms that may cause cross infection from patients to dental staff. The control of cross infection is an imperative issue when dealing with dental impression materials in Dentistry and the lack of procedures for its control is currently a real problem. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antimicrobial effectiveness of 0,5% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutaraldehyde immersion of alginate.Thirty edentulous patients were selected for the present study. Maxillary ridge impressions were taken out in 30 patients with alginate and was randomly divided into two groups containing 15 impressions each group, each impression was swabbed and incubated on nutrient agar culture media. This constituted the control group. Group A impressions were immersed in 0.5% sodium hypochlorite and group B impressions were immersed in 2%glutaraldehyde. All impressions received the similar disinfectant treatment. After 10 minutes the impressions were reswabbed and incubated for 24 hours and microbial colony count was carried out. It was observed that 2% glutaraldehydeis more efficient in reducing the number of bacterial colony count compared to 0.5% sodium hypochlorite.2% glutaraldehyde eliminated 46.74% of bacteria colony count while 0.5% sodium hypochlorite eliminated 43.33% of bacteria colony count. Dental impression materials can act as vectors transmitting a significant amount of microorganisms. It was concluded that 0.5% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutaraldehyde was stistically equally effective in reducing the number of bacterial colony count. 2% glutaraldehyde was found to be marginally more effective than 0.5% sodium hypochlorite on alginate impressions.","PeriodicalId":14489,"journal":{"name":"IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antimicrobial Efficacy of Immersion 0.5% Sodium Hypochlorite And 2% Glutaraldehyde Disinfectants on Alginate Impressions\",\"authors\":\"Eddy Dahar, J. Kaur\",\"doi\":\"10.9790/0853-1606131114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dental impressions often carry microorganisms that may cause cross infection from patients to dental staff. The control of cross infection is an imperative issue when dealing with dental impression materials in Dentistry and the lack of procedures for its control is currently a real problem. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antimicrobial effectiveness of 0,5% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutaraldehyde immersion of alginate.Thirty edentulous patients were selected for the present study. Maxillary ridge impressions were taken out in 30 patients with alginate and was randomly divided into two groups containing 15 impressions each group, each impression was swabbed and incubated on nutrient agar culture media. This constituted the control group. Group A impressions were immersed in 0.5% sodium hypochlorite and group B impressions were immersed in 2%glutaraldehyde. All impressions received the similar disinfectant treatment. After 10 minutes the impressions were reswabbed and incubated for 24 hours and microbial colony count was carried out. It was observed that 2% glutaraldehydeis more efficient in reducing the number of bacterial colony count compared to 0.5% sodium hypochlorite.2% glutaraldehyde eliminated 46.74% of bacteria colony count while 0.5% sodium hypochlorite eliminated 43.33% of bacteria colony count. Dental impression materials can act as vectors transmitting a significant amount of microorganisms. It was concluded that 0.5% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutaraldehyde was stistically equally effective in reducing the number of bacterial colony count. 2% glutaraldehyde was found to be marginally more effective than 0.5% sodium hypochlorite on alginate impressions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14489,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.9790/0853-1606131114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9790/0853-1606131114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

牙印通常携带微生物,可能引起患者与牙科工作人员之间的交叉感染。在处理牙印模材料时,交叉感染的控制是一个迫切需要解决的问题,目前缺乏控制交叉感染的程序是一个现实问题。本研究的目的是评价0.5%次氯酸钠和2%戊二醛浸泡海藻酸盐的抗菌效果。本研究选择30例无牙患者。30例患者用海藻酸盐取出上颌脊印模,随机分为两组,每组15个印模,每个印模拭子在营养琼脂培养基上孵育。这就是对照组。A组印痕浸泡在0.5%次氯酸钠中,B组印痕浸泡在2%戊二醛中。所有的印痕都接受了类似的消毒处理。10分钟后,重新擦拭印痕,孵育24小时,进行微生物菌落计数。研究发现,与0.5%次氯酸钠相比,2%戊二醛能更有效地减少细菌菌落计数。2%戊二醛和0.5%次氯酸钠分别消除46.74%和43.33%的细菌菌落。牙印材料可以作为传播大量微生物的载体。结果表明,0.5%次氯酸钠和2%戊二醛在减少菌落数量方面具有统计学上相同的效果。发现2%戊二醛比0.5%次氯酸钠对海藻酸盐印痕略微有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Antimicrobial Efficacy of Immersion 0.5% Sodium Hypochlorite And 2% Glutaraldehyde Disinfectants on Alginate Impressions
Dental impressions often carry microorganisms that may cause cross infection from patients to dental staff. The control of cross infection is an imperative issue when dealing with dental impression materials in Dentistry and the lack of procedures for its control is currently a real problem. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antimicrobial effectiveness of 0,5% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutaraldehyde immersion of alginate.Thirty edentulous patients were selected for the present study. Maxillary ridge impressions were taken out in 30 patients with alginate and was randomly divided into two groups containing 15 impressions each group, each impression was swabbed and incubated on nutrient agar culture media. This constituted the control group. Group A impressions were immersed in 0.5% sodium hypochlorite and group B impressions were immersed in 2%glutaraldehyde. All impressions received the similar disinfectant treatment. After 10 minutes the impressions were reswabbed and incubated for 24 hours and microbial colony count was carried out. It was observed that 2% glutaraldehydeis more efficient in reducing the number of bacterial colony count compared to 0.5% sodium hypochlorite.2% glutaraldehyde eliminated 46.74% of bacteria colony count while 0.5% sodium hypochlorite eliminated 43.33% of bacteria colony count. Dental impression materials can act as vectors transmitting a significant amount of microorganisms. It was concluded that 0.5% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutaraldehyde was stistically equally effective in reducing the number of bacterial colony count. 2% glutaraldehyde was found to be marginally more effective than 0.5% sodium hypochlorite on alginate impressions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Persistent Enlarged Thymus in an Adult Human Cadaver Choledocholithiasis And Acute Cholangitis Following PostCholecystectomy Clip Migration Paraduodenal Hernia: A Rare Case Report A Study on Hematological Abnormalities in Chronic Liver Diseases Screening of Risk Factors of Hypertension among Urban and Rural Populations of District-Hapur
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1