Abstract
The virucidal efficacy of germicides acting on an irreversible hydrocolloid surface is not known. Tests that are currently performed on germicides do not simulate the conditions under which the germicides are often used. One major concern for the dental profession is the disinfection of dental impressions, particularly irreversible hydrocolloid impressions. This study was designed to test the biocidal action of germicides against an enveloped virus on an irreversible hydrocolloid surface. The disinfection model, which was developed to simulate clinical conditions, specified the use of vesicular stomatitus virus, an animal virus amenable to safe handling. A 0.5% sodium hypochlorite spray inactivated the virus when the spray was allowed to remain on the impression 3 to 10 minutes. The iodophor disinfectant required a 3- to 10-minute immersion for total inactivation. Although 2% glutaraldehyde achieved total viral inactivation in less than 1 minute, the authors conclude that short disinfectant sprays, in general, are not an appropriate disinfection method.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 701-707 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry |
| Volume | 63 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 1990 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:The virucidal efficacy of germicides acting on an irreversible hydrocolloid surface is not known. Tests that are currently performed on germicides do not simulate the conditions under which the germicides are often used. One major concern for the dental profession is the disinfection of dental impressions, particularly irreversible hydrocolloid impressions. This study was designed to test the biocidal action of germicides against an enveloped virus on an irreversible hydrocolloid surface. The disinfection model, which was developed to simulate clinical conditions, specified the use of vesicular stomatitus virus, an animal virus amenable to safe handling. A 0.6% sodium hypochlorite spray inactivated the virus when the spray was allowed to remain on the impression 3 to 10 minutes. The iodophor disiniectant required a 3-to lo-minute immersion for total inactivation. Although 2% glutaraldehyde achieved total viral inactivation in less than 1 minute, the authors conclude that short disinfectant sprays, in general, are not an appropriate disinfection method. (J PROSTHETDENT~QQ@~~:~O~-7.) D ental practitioners, auxiliaries, and laboratory personnel are subject to significant risk with respect to infectious disease, which can be spread by saliva or blood as droplets and aerosols, or by direct contact.1-3 Underscored in this risk profile are hepatitis B virus (HBV), the AIDS retrovirus (human immunodeficiency virus [HIV]), the herpes viruses (HSV), the tubercle bacillus, staphylococci, streptococci, and viruses infesting the upper respiratory tract. The practices recommended for the prevention of disease transmission include sterilization of some items, disinfection of others, and partial isolation (barrier protection) of the practiti0ner.w 4 A major concern is the problem of disinfecting dental impressions, particularly irreversible hydrocolloid (hydrophilic) impressions. Irreversible hydrocolloid is a complex carbohydrate that imbibes water. It is reasonable to assume that if pathogens are also imbibed into the irreversible hy- Presented at the Midwest Academy of Prosthodontics meeting, Minneapolis, Minn. Supported by research grant No. 2S076-RR-532 from the National Institute of Dental Research, National Institutes of Health, Be-thesda, Md. *Former Instructor, Department of Rehabilitative Sciences; cur-rently NRSA Fellow, Cariology Program. “Assistant Professor and Director, Complete Denture Clinic, De-partment of Rehabilitative Sciences. **‘Research Associate, Department of Oral Sciences. ****Professor, Department of Rehabilitative Sciences. 1011/18816 drocolloid, they would be less exposed to the action of germicides. Several studies have tested the effects of various disinfectants on dimensional stability of irreversible hydrocolloid impressions. 5-10 However, few studies have examined the residual infectious potential of an impression after a disinfection procedure.