Dentistry is classified in the very-high-risk category of
occupations involved with aerosol production. What does this have
to do with COVID-19? Quite a lot. Here is the latest
research.
Background
A novel human coronavirus—now named severe acute respiratory
syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)—emerged from Wuhan, China, in
late 2019 and is causing a pandemic.1 Coronaviruses are enveloped
RNA viruses that affect animals and humans.2 Coronavirus particles
range from 60 to 140 nanometers (0.06 to 0.14 micrometers), with an
average of 0.125 micron, and have distinctive spikes of nine to 12
nanometers that give the appearance of “coronas” around the sun.
Cell death is observed 96 hours after inoculation on surface layers
of human airway epithelial cells.
Currently, there are six coronavirus species that cause human
disease. Four of them—229E, OC43, NL63, and HKU1—often result in
symptoms of the common cold. The other two strains—severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East
respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV)—are zoonotic (originate
from animals and cross over to humans), more serious, and sometimes
linked to fatal illness.
SARS-CoV-1 was the causal agent of the severe acute
respiratory syndrome outbreaks in 2002 and 2003 in Guangdong
Province, China. During this outbreak, approximately 8,098 patients
were affected with 774 deaths, resulting in a mortality rate of 9%.
This rate was much higher in elderly individuals, with mortality
rates approaching 50% in those over age 60. Transmission of
SARS-CoV-1 was relatively inefficient because it spread only
through direct contact with infected individuals; once an
individual exhibited symptoms, the virus spread. The outbreak was
largely contained because it was easy to identify those individuals
who were capable of spreading the disease. A few cases of
super-spreading events occurred whereby individuals with higher
viral loads and the ability to aerosolize the virus were able to
infect multiple people. As a result of the relatively inefficient
transmission of SARS-CoV-1, its outbreak was controllable through
the means of quarantining individuals in households and health-care
centers.
The stability of SARS-CoV-2 is like SARS-CoV-1, with an 80%
genetic makeup similarity. Both viruses bind to the human cell via
the spike (S) protein to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor
(ACE2) to gain entry, but there are a few differences (figure 2).
First, higher viral loads have been detected in nasal passages and
the upper respiratory tract of individuals infected with
SARS-CoV-2, which mean coughs and sneezes may contain higher viral
loads than its predecessor virus. Second, the potential for
individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 to shed and transmit the virus
while asymptomatic is much greater, and those in the latent stages
of the disease often shed the virus at a higher rate. Third—and
most significantly—this new virus strain has been shown to be much
more efficient at traveling more considerable distances and
becoming aerosolized.
Aerosol particle transmission
Particles are classified based on size: coarse particles are
2.5–10 microns, fine particles are less than 2.5 microns, and
ultrafine particles are less than 0.1 micron. The nose typically
filters air particles above 10 microns. If a particle is less than
10 microns, it can enter the respiratory system. If it is less than
2.5 microns, it can enter the alveoli. A particle less than 0.1
micron, or an ultrafine particle like the COVID-19 virus, can enter
the bloodstream and target organs such as the heart and brain. The
current scientific consensus is that most transmission via
respiratory secretions happens in the form of large respiratory
droplets rather than small aerosols. Droplets are often heavy
enough that they do not travel very far; instead, they fall from
the air after traveling up to six feet.
The problem occurs when viral particles are aerosolized by a
cough, sneeze, or dental care. In these instances, particles can
potentially travel across far greater distances, with estimates up
to 20 feet, from an infected person and then incite secondary
infections elsewhere in the environment. These aerosolized droplet
nuclei can remain in an area, suspended in the air, even after the
person who emitted them has left and thus can infect health-care
workers and contaminate surfaces. Here are some examples of the
longevity of COVID-19 in various places:
• The virus is viable up to 72 hours after application to
plastic and stainless steel surfaces.
• The virus is viable up to 24 hours on cardboard
surfaces.
• The virus is viable up to nine hours on copper
surfaces.
• The virus is viable in suspended aerosols up to three
hours.
Viral dosimetry and dental considerations
Whenever a new virus emerges, the question needs to be asked
if there is a dose-dependent response between viral load contact
and severity of the disease. In other words, does the number of
viral particles a patient initially encounters, or repeated dosing,
determine the severity of the symptoms? One study reported that
viral loads in nasopharyngeal swabs from a group of patients with
severe COVID-19 were 60 times higher on average than the viral
loads seen among patients with a mild form of the disease.
If this is the case, dental aerosolization may pose an
additional threat. Does a patient who has viral particles confined
to the nasopharyngeal area become susceptible to aerosol aspiration
into the lungs, leading to increased disease severity? This
question was inspired by and based on the work of Bruce L Davidson,
MD, MPH—a pulmonary physician and researcher in Seattle, expert in
respiratory transmission of infection, former president of the
National Tuberculosis Controllers Association, and member of the
HHS Secretary’s Advisory Council for the Elimination of
Tuberculosis—who has extensively looked at aspirational types of
pneumonia.15 According to Dr. Davidson, "This very real possibility
can be easily diminished by reducing biofilm viral load in the
mouth and pharynx region with .5% peroxide for 60 seconds, thereby
reducing viral load and basically disinfecting the throat. Peroxide
drops cornavirus replication by >4 logs. These types of
environmental controls are often not implemented." In addition, Dr.
Davidson states that nose-covering filters and devices are simple
and effective. Of course, well-designed controlled studies are
needed to further this research and recommendation.
Dental aerosolization
Dentists who treat patients using aerosolization are at an
extremely dangerous risk of inoculation of themselves, their dental
assistants, other office staff members, and reinoculation of the
patients. Most risk occurs from splatter and droplet transmission
to the midface of the dentist and assistant, as well as the nasal
area of the patient.In addition, periodontal treatment has a much
higher incidence of droplet transmission than prosthetic
treatment.Ultrasonic and sonic transmission during nonsurgical
procedures had the highest incidence of particle transmission,
followed by air polishing, air/water syringe, and high-speed
handpiece aerosolization. One study found that ultrasonic
instrumentation can transmit 100,000 microbes per cubic foot with
aerosolization of up to six feet, and, if improper air current is
present, microbes can last anywhere from 35 minutes to 17
hours.
Because of these inherent dangers to dentists, team members,
and patients, the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) just
released a new report called “Guidance on Preparing Workplaces for
COVID-19.”14 This document categorizes occupational risk as very
high, high, medium, and lower risk. The occupations that are
involved with aerosol production fall into the category of very
high risk, according to OSHA.
Since dentistry is in the very-high-risk category, the section
“Implement Workplace Controls, Engineering Controls” recommends
that dental practices install negative-pressure rooms or airborne
infection isolation rooms for operatories in which procedures
involving aerosol will be performed. In addition, recommendations
for the dentist and staff working in areas of direct contact with
aerosols include wearing the following personal protective
equipment (PPE) masks: “Other types of acceptable respirators
include: a R/P95, N/R/P99, or N/R/P100 filtering facepiece
respirator; an air-purifying elastomeric (e.g., half-face or
full-face) respirator with appropriate filters or cartridges;
powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) with high-efficiency
particulate arrestance (HEPA) filter; or supplied air respirator
(SAR).
Conclusion
Many changes in infection control procedures and the
associated dental armamentaria can be expected to arise in the
post-COVID-19 world of dentistry. The extent and severity of change
will be dictated by evidence and research into the best and safest
practices. Prior to mandating change that will involve an extreme
financial and architectural change of the current dental office,
research should be conducted that evaluates current available
practices, methodology, and instrumentation that can
mitigate/obviate the risk of transmission, while being financially
and practically expeditious.