Search tips
Search criteria

Results 1-4 (4)

Clipboard (0)

Select a Filter Below

more »
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  The Effect of Intraoral Suction on Oxygen-Enriched Surgical Environments: A Mechanism for Reducing the Risk of Surgical Fires 
Anesthesia Progress  2014;61(4):155-161.
In this study, a mechanical model was applied in order to replicate potential surgical fire conditions in an oxygen-enriched environment with and without high-volume suction typical for dental surgical applications. During 41 trials, 3 combustion events were measured: an audible pop, a visible flash of light, and full ignition. In at least 11 of 21 trials without suction, all 3 conditions were observed, sometimes with an extent of fire that required early termination of the experimental trial. By contrast, in 18 of 20 with-suction trials, ignition did not occur at all, and in the 2 cases where ignition did occur, the fire was qualitatively a much smaller, candle-like flame. Statistically comparing these 3 combustion events in the no-suction versus with-suction trials, ignition (P = .0005), audible pop (P = .0211), and flash (P = .0092) were all significantly more likely in the no-suction condition. These results suggest a possible significant and new element to be added to existing surgical fire safety protocols toward making surgical fires the “never-events” they should be.
PMCID: PMC4269355  PMID: 25517551
Surgical fires; Oxygen-enriched environments; High-volume suction.
2.  Factors Involved In Dental Surgery Fires: A Review of the Literature 
Anesthesia Progress  2014;61(1):21-25.
Surgical fires are well-characterized, readily preventable, potentially devastating operating room catastrophes that continue to occur from 20 to 100 times per year or, by one estimate, up to 600 times per year in US operating rooms, sometimes with fatal results. The most significant risk factors for surgical fires involve (a) the use of an ignition source, such as laser or electrocautery equipment, in or around an oxygen-enriched environment in the head, neck, and upper torso area and (b) the concurrent delivery of supplemental oxygen, especially via nasal cannula. Nonetheless, while these 2 conditions occur very commonly in dental surgery, especially in pediatric dental surgery where sedation and anesthesia are regularly indicated, there is a general absence of documented dental surgical fires in the literature. Barring the possibility of underreporting for fear of litigation, this may suggest that there is another mechanism or mechanisms present in dental or pediatric dental surgery that mitigates this worst-case risk of surgical fires. Some possible explanations for this include: greater fire safety awareness by dental practitioners, incidental ventilation of oxygen-enriched environments in patient oral cavities due to breathing, or suction used by dental practitioners during procedures. This review of the literature provides a background to suggest that the practice of using intraoral suction in conjunction with the use of supplemental oxygen during dental procedures may alter the conditions needed for the initiation of intraoral fires. To date, there appear to be no published studies describing the ability of intraoral suctioning devices to alter the ambient oxygen concentration in an intraoral environment. In vivo models that would allow examination of intraoral suction on the ambient oxygen concentration in a simulated intraoral environment may then provide a valuable foundation for evaluating the safety of current clinical dental surgical practices, particularly in regard to the treatment of children.
PMCID: PMC3975610  PMID: 24697822
Surgical fire; Operating room; Dentistry; Dental treatment; Airway fire
3.  The Use of Office-Based Sedation and General Anesthesia by Board Certified Pediatric Dentists Practicing in the United States 
Anesthesia Progress  2012;59(1):12-17.
The purpose of this study is to explore the use of office-based sedation by board-certified pediatric dentists practicing in the United States. Pediatric dentists have traditionally relied upon self-administered sedation techniques to provide office-based sedation. The use of dentist anesthesiologists to provide office-based sedation is an emerging trend. This study examines and compares these two models of office-based sedations. A survey evaluating office-based sedation of diplomates of the American Board of Pediatric Dentistry (ABPD) based on gender, age, years in practice, practice types, regions, and years as a diplomate of the ABPD was completed by 494 active members. The results were summarized using frequencies and percentages. Relationships of dentist age, gender, and number of years in practice with the use of intravenous (IV) sedation was completed using two-way contingency tables and Mantel-Haenszel tests for ordered categorical data. Relationships of office-based sedation use and the type of one's practice were examined using Pearson chi-square tests. Of the 1917 surveys e-mailed, 494 completed the survey for a response rate of 26%. Over 70% of board-certified US pediatric dentists use some form of sedation in their offices. Less than 20% administer IV sedation, 20 to 40% use a dentist anesthesiologist, and 60 to 70% would use dentist anesthesiologists if one were available.
PMCID: PMC3309296  PMID: 22428969
Office-based; Dentist-anesthesiologist; Pediatric dentist
4.  Demand in Pediatric Dentistry for Sedation and General Anesthesia by Dentist Anesthesiologists: A Survey of Directors of Dentist Anesthesiologist and Pediatric Dentistry Residencies 
Anesthesia Progress  2012;59(1):3-11.
This study describes what training programs in pediatric dentistry and dental anesthesiology are doing to meet future needs for deep sedation/general anesthesia services required for pediatric dentistry. Residency directors from 10 dental anesthesiology training programs in North America and 79 directors from pediatric dentistry training programs in North America were asked to answer an 18-item and 22-item online survey, respectively, through an online survey tool. The response rate for the 10 anesthesiology training program directors was 9 of 10 or 90%. The response rate for the 79 pediatric dentistry training program directors was 46 of 79 or 58%. Thirty-seven percent of pediatric dentistry programs use clinic-based deep sedation/general anesthesia for dental treatment in addition to hospital-based deep sedation/general anesthesia. Eighty-eight percent of those programs use dentist anesthesiologists for administration of deep sedation/general anesthesia in a clinic-based setting. Pediatric dentistry residency directors perceive a future change in the need for deep sedation/general anesthesia services provided by dentist anesthesiologists to pediatric dentists: 64% anticipate an increase in need for dentist anesthesiologist services, while 36% anticipate no change. Dental anesthesiology directors compared to 2, 5, and 10 years ago have seen an increase in the requests for dentist anesthesiologist services by pediatric dentists reported by 56% of respondents (past 2 years), 63% of respondents (past 5 years), and 88% of respondents (past 10 years), respectively. Predicting the future need of dentist anesthesiologists is an uncertain task, but these results show pediatric dentistry directors and dental anesthesiology directors are considering the need, and they recognize a trend of increased need for dentist anesthesiologist services over the past decade.
PMCID: PMC3309300  PMID: 22428968
Demand for services; Dental anesthesiologist; Pediatric dentist

Results 1-4 (4)