J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30: 95–101 Copyright r Blackwell Munksgaard 2003

Printed in Denmark. All rights reserved

Review Paper
Ultrasonic dental scaler: S. C. Trenter and A. D. Walmsley
The School of Dentistry, The University of
Birmingham, St Chad’s Queensway,

associated hazards Birmingham B4 6NN, UK

Trenter SC, Walmsley AD: Ultrasonic dental scaler: associated hazards. J Clin
Periodontol 2003; 30: 95–101. r Blackwell Munksgaard, 2003.

Abstract
Background: The ultrasonic dental scaler is a valuable tool in the prevention of
periodontal disease; however, this equipment has a number of hazards with which it is
associated. These include heating of the tooth during scaling, vibrational hazards
causing cell disruption, possible platelet damage by cavitation, associated
electromagnetic fields that can interrupt pacemakers, auditory damage to patient and
clinician and the release of aerosols containing dangerous bacteria.
Objective: To collate the research reported on the various hazards associated with the
ultrasonic dental scaler and discuss possible future research areas.
Data Sources: The scientific literature was searched using Web of Science,
EMBASE and Medline, and the results of these were then hand-searched to eliminate
nonrelevant papers.
Conclusions: This review outlines some of the research conducted into these areas of
associated hazard in order to assess their significance in the clinical situation, and Key words: ultrasound; cavitation; auditory;
discusses ideas for future research. Suggestions of recommendations are given, which vibration; aerosol
have been previously investigated for their aid in reducing possible hazards, to ensure
the safe working of ultrasonic scalers in the dental practice. Accepted for publication 1 February 2002

The use of ultrasound in dentistry was
proposed by Catuna (1953) for the
process of cutting teeth. Although
development for ultrasonic cavity pre-
paration became redundant due to the
introduction of the rotary drill (Street
1959), further work undertaken by
Zinner (1955) showed that ultrasound
could be used to remove deposits from
the teeth. Ultrasonic scaling became an
accepted procedure, and it was stated in
1960 that the instruments were an
acceptable alternative to hand scalers
as they were found to be as effective in
the removal of calculus (McCall &
Szmyd 1960). Many studies have come
to the conclusion that ultrasonic scalers
are as effective as hand instrumentation
with regard to the clinical outcome
(Sorrin & Ewen 1965; Suppipat 1974;
Torfason et al. 1979; Badersten et al.
1981; Breininger et al. 1987). In the late
1980s and 1990s there was interest in
the nature of the cleaning process where
the roles of cavitation and acoustic
microstreaming were shown to play a
part (Walmsley et al. 1984).
There are no up-to-date figures on the
number of scaling units that are used,
but it is known that the majority of
dental practices have some form of
powered scaling unit. Although ultra-
sound is used routinely on patients,
there are few deleterious effects or
hazards associated with its use. How-
ever, it does produce undesirable side
effects. For example, it may produce
thermal damage to the tissues during
clinical use. Ultrasonic vibration can
cause airborne problems, and there
is a high electromagnetic radiation
emitted with these devices that
can interfere with electrical items
(Walmsley 1988).
In the clinical situation, the ultrasonic
scaler is applied lightly to the tooth
surface to remove plaque and calculus.
In this situation, it will alter the
topography of the tooth surface.
Whether this surface finish produced is
biologically acceptable for reattachment
of the periodontal tissues is still in
discussion. There are a number of
papers in the literature that are directed
to the root surface finish (Allen &
Rhoads 1963, Pameijer et al. 1972,
Lee et al. 1996, Kocher et al. 2001).
For the purposes of this review,
root surface finish is considered to
be the acceptable outcome of the
direct application of the ultrasonic
scaler. This paper outlines the second-
ary or undesirable hazards produced
by the clinical use of the ultrasonic
scaler.
The ultrasonic scaler may result in
potential hazards to both the patient
undergoing treatment and to the clinical
operator of the equipment. These po-
tential hazards were highlighted in a
previous review of the available litera-
ture (Walmsley 1988). In summary, it
96 Trenter & Walmsley
was concluded that while the use of the
ultrasonic scaler posed possible un-
wanted biological effects, these out-
weighed the beneficial effects of
treatment. The aim of this study was
to review the literature on the hazards
associated with ultrasonic scaling since
this review. Research in some areas of
the hazards of ultrasonic scalers is
sparse since 1988, therefore highlight-
ing a need for further research.
Literature Search
The scientific literature was searched
using Web of Science, EMBASE and
Medline with combinations of the
following search terms, ultrason with
hazard, thermal, vibration, cavitation,
electromagnetic fields, auditory and
aerosol. The search was limited to
English language publications. The
results were then hand-searched to
eliminate nonrelevant subject areas in-
cluding ultrasonic cleaning baths,
MHz therapeutic ultrasound, etc. The
articles selected were considered to be
relevant to the use of the ultrasonic
scaler.
Thermal Pulp
Temperature rises in the tooth caused
by heating can cause damage to the
pulp and dentine. The blood circulation
aids in removing heat from the area
and differences may be observed
when assessing pulpal temperatures
either in vitro or in vivo. Heating of
the pulp should be avoided as tempera-
ture increases can cause irreversible
pulpitis (Chang & Wilder-Smith 1998).
Studies have investigated the extent of
damage caused by the direct application
of heat to the tooth. Thermal pulp
damage assessed in monkeys showed
that 15% of teeth did not recover from a
61C pulp temperature rise. An increase
above 111C was shown to invariably
destroy the pulp, and a 171C increase
produced pulp death (Zach & Cohen
1965). If sufficient heat reaches the pulp
during dental procedures, it can lead to
vascular injury and tissue necrosis
(Nyborg & Brannstrom 1968). How-
ever, recent work suggests that an
increase of 11.21C produces no damage
to the pulp tissues (Baldissara et al.
1997).
The use of the ultrasonic scaler will
produce an increase in temperature, and
this heating may be due to
 frictional heating due to contact
between scaler and tooth,
 direct temperature application by the
irrigation fluid and
 acoustic energy absorption of ultra-
sound transmitted into the tooth.
Thermal effects on the dental pulp from
ultrasonic drills saw much research in
the 1950s, involving both animal and
human teeth (Walmsley 1988). How-
ever, the ultrasonic dental scaler had
seen little investigation up to the mid-
1980s. It was reported that the elevation
in tooth temperature in vitro due to
acoustic energy absorption was 21C
(Williams et al. 1985). When monitored
from within the pulpal chamber filled
with coupling gel, an in vitro study
demonstrated that under normal scaling
conditions with the irrigation flow rate
set at 20 ml/min the temperature rise
should not exceed 81C (Walmsley et al.
1986).
Since the review was composed,
other workers using a sonic scaler in
vitro found that the dentine could
rise by 351C if coolant was not used,
but in the presence of coolant a rise
of only 41C was observed (Kocher &
Plagmann 1996). Investigations into
the irrigation effect on the heat trans-
mitted into the dentine found that
with an ultrasonic scaler, an irrigation
of 15 ml/min produced a temperature
increase of no more than 101C. How-
ever, when using a bulb syringe a
temperature rise of no more than 51C
was reported, with a flow rate of 30 ml/
min of saline solution (Nicoll & Peters
1998).
Investigation with dogs has shown
that the temperature of dentine does not
increase when an uncooled ultrasonic
scaler is applied to the tooth for 90 s
(Verez-Fraguela et al. 2000). However,
the ultrasonic effect produced damage
comparable with acute pulpitis, which
was similar to the effects produced by
451C direct heat applied in a control
animal.
These studies all conclude that pow-
ered scaling should not be considered
without irrigation and the flow rate
should be in the region of at least 20–
30 ml/min. Further investigations into
the minimum temperature increase that
the tooth can withstand without causing
damage are needed.
Thermal Periodontal Tissues
The effect of ultrasonic scaling on the
periodontal tissues has been researched.
Early workers demonstrated that ultra-
sonic scaling causes no injury to the
periodontal membrane, alveolar bone or
the gingiva (Mallernee 1958). Further
histological examination of tissues im-
mediately after ultrasonic scaling
showed superficial tissue coagulation
(Goldman 1960; Ewen 1961; Schaffer
et al. 1964). It was found that curettage
with ultrasonic instruments resulted in
quicker healing (Sanderson 1966).
After searching the literature, no
papers concerning this type of work
could be located. Little is known about
the thermal effect on the soft tissues,
caused by ultrasonic scaling. Work has
shown both no effect and tissue coagu-
lation to be evident after ultrasonic
scaling. Further work needs to be
conducted into the effects of acoustic
absorption of the periodontal tissues
during the ultrasonic scaling process.
Cavitation
If trauma occurs to a blood vessel, then
the function of platelets is to adhere to
each other or to materials such as
collagen while releasing potent chemi-
cals to initiate and accelerate the blood
coagulation system (Rischer & Easton
1992). This process is essential when
preventing blood loss, but may be
hazardous by causing unwanted blood
clots in the system if it is activated
inadvertently.
Vibrating a wire, at an ultrasonic
frequency, will potentially damage ery-
throcytes, leucocytes and platelets. Hae-
molysis of heparinised blood occurred
with a wire vibrating at 20 kHz and the
level of platelet damage was dependent
on the wire diameter (Williams et al.
1970a, Crowell et al. 1977). Blood
platelets are sensitive to shear stresses,
and such forces are produced by the
occurrence of acoustic microstreaming
around an ultrasonically oscillating wire
(Williams 1974). A study conducted in
vivo on mice to assess the effect of a
wire vibrating at a frequency of 20 kHz
placed against an intact blood vessel
resulted in the production of platelet
emboli and the formation of thrombi
(Williams 1977). This work was re-
peated with a commercially available
ultrasonic scaler, which demonstrated
similar findings (Walmsley et al.
1987b).

Ultrasonic scalers produce acoustic
microstreaming fields around the scal-
ing tip. The shear forces produced
are more than powerful enough to
damage platelets. Preliminary investiga-
tions have been conducted with a
25 kHz ultrasonic dental scaler on
rabbits in vivo (Williams & Chater
1980). The results showed no significant
danger of thrombosis, although the
geometry of the tooth and slower blood
flow rates observed in the pulp cavity
suggest that pulpal thrombosis from
dental ultrasonic scaling is still a
possibility. Acoustic microstreaming
fields may be generated on the surface
of the tooth root and at the entrance to
the pulp canal (Walmsley et al. 1987b).
If the formation of a thrombus occurs in
vessels supplying the tooth pulp, this
could result in tooth death during
ultrasonic scaling. This merits further
investigation.
The pulpal blood flow within cat
teeth has been investigated. A 30 kHz
dental scaler was applied to a cat’s
canine for 1 s (Olgart et al. 1991). At
low amplitude, it was found to cause an
increased blood flow by stimulating
periodontal fibres. However, at high
amplitudes it activated the nerves in
the pulp. It is uncertain as to whether
percussion caused vasodilation in the
pulp by activation of periodontal and/or
pulpal fibres.
The cavitation activity in the cooling
water passed over the scaler tip can
also be involved in the removal of
plaque and stain from the tooth surface
(Walmsley et al. 1988). The effective-
ness of this activity is dependent on
the shape of the scaling tip, its orienta-
tion to the tooth and the generator
power setting. Further work has high-
lighted that the surface eroded by
cavitation is an area of 0.66 mm2
producing a pitted surface finish
(Walmsley et al. 1990). Such cavitating
water, while being beneficial, may also
harm the tissues at a distance to the
cleaning process. This may merit further
research.
In summary, the cavitational activity
caused by the ultrasonic scaler can aid
the cleaning process by removal of
plaque from the tooth surface and can
also affect the blood flows within the
tooth. It is unclear as to whether this
cavitational activity poses a significant
problem clinically. Further work is
required to look into the significance
of possible changes to the periodontal
tissues caused by cavitation.
Vibration to Operator
It is well recognised that the large
amplitudes produced by pneumatic
drills will cause ‘‘white finger’’. This
is a disruption in the blood flow to the
fingers, caused by the vibration that is
passed from the drill through to the
hand. The vibrational amplitude asso-
ciated with dental scalers is small but
may still have the potential to produce
this phenomenon. There is sparse in-
formation regarding this hazard and
‘‘vibration white finger’’ has only been
a registered disease in the UK since
1985 (Burke & Jacques 1993), although
research into dentists’ tactile perception
and the effect of vibration had been
investigated since the early 1980s
(Lundström & Lindmark 1982).
In a clinical trial, tests were con-
ducted that compared 10 male dental
technicians who had worked for more
than 7 years and 10 men not exposed to
occupational vibration (Hjortsberg et al.
1989). The male dental technicians
frequently used grinding equipment,
which produced vibrations of up to
40 kHz. It was found that response time
to stimuli on fingers was higher in
technicians, implying nerve or receptor
dysfunction. It also revealed damage to
myelinated and unmyelinated fibres in
the fingers of technicians.
The sensory perception of both hands
was compared between dentists with a
minimum of 10 years and less than 5
years in clinical dentistry (Ekenvall
et al. 1990). The study assessed their
reaction to vibration, temperature and
heat pain. Some subjects experienced
symptoms, including tingling, numb-
ness and reduced manipulative dexter-
ity, although none of the subjects had
neurological symptoms in their nondo-
minant hand. It was confirmed that
long-term exposure to ultrasonic scalers
had a high frequency of neurological
symptoms that was especially prevalent
in their dominant hand. However, it was
concluded that these neurological symp-
toms were not due to a vibrating hand
piece since the exposed second and
unexposed fifth fingers were similarly
affected.
A telephone questionnaire, including
general work and symptom-related
questions, was carried out among 100
dentists and 100 pharmacists. Although
it was observed that there was a high
occurrence of neurological symptoms in
the hands of dentists, it is unclear as to
whether these symptoms were due to
Ultrasonic dental scaler 97
exposure of high-frequency vibrations
or caused by nerve entrapment at the
wrist or elsewhere (Milerad & Ekenval
1990).
A study was undertaken with a group
of 120 people. It consisted of 60 dentists
and hygienists exposed to vibrations,
from high-speed handpieces and ultra-
sonic scalers, and a control group of 60
dental assistants and medical nurses.
They were assessed for manual perfor-
mance, tactility, strength, etc. It is
possible that neurological and func-
tional disturbances of the hands, ob-
served in female dental personnel, could
be related to the use of dental scalers
(Akesson et al. 1995). In this study, it
was found that the vibrations could
produce a reduction in strength and
tactile sensitivity and performance due
to the disruption of blood and nerve
supplies to the fingers. It was stated that
dentists and dental hygienists could use
vibrating tools for an average of 75 min
a day. This work has highlighted the
need for the reduction of exposure to
vibration from dental handpieces.
It is unclear from current research as
to whether the handpiece vibration
causes ‘‘white finger’’ in dental person-
nel. Research is needed to aid in the
development, design and production of
an ultrasonic handpiece that will elim-
inate any vibration hazards to the
operator.
Aerosol
When using the ultrasonic scaler a fine
aerosol is produced, which may transmit
pathogenic microorganisms. This aero-
sol production could be hazardous to
health (Suppipat 1974). In those dental
clinics where ultrasonic scalers are
being used, there is an increased amount
of airborne bacteria, which increases the
potential for the spread of infection
between patients and between patient
and operator. However, there is no
evidence that any serious diseases have
been contracted in this manner (Hol-
brook et al. 1978). Due to the aerosol
produced by mechanical scalers, any
high-risk infective patients should be
treated with hand instruments.
Aerosol containing microorganisms
can be reduced by 99% during ultra-
sonic scaling, if air is blown down from
the ceiling and through vents in the wall
base which are then filtered to re-enter
the cycle (Williams et al. 1970b). It was
shown that any risk of contamination by
98 Trenter & Walmsley
aerosols can be greatly reduced if the
operator uses a high filtering properly
fitted face mask (Micik et al. 1971).
Aerosol generation by a magnetos-
trictive and a piezoelectric ultrasonic
scaler has been compared with a sonic
scaler and no difference was found in
the amount of bacteria-contaminated
aerosols generated by the three types
of instrument (Williams Gross et al.
1992). The use of a pre-procedural rinse
using an antiseptic mouthwash reduces
the microbial content of aerosols during
ultrasonic scaling (Fine et al. 1992). It
can produce up to a 94% reduction in
colony forming units compared to a
nonrinsed control. A clinical study has
confirmed that the use of a pre-proce-
dural antiseptic mouthwash 40 min prior
to treatment can significantly reduce the
bacteria in the aerosol produced during
ultrasonic scaling (Fine et al. 1993).
Many studies have been conducted into
the use of chlorhexidine irrigants during
ultrasonic scaling, but this has only been
assessed from the clinical outcome of
the patient and not the effects on any
aerosols produced.
Assessment of the aerosol pollution
before, during and after treatment with
an ultrasonic scaler has been completed
(Legnani et al. 1994). The airborne
bacterial level was measured and initial
measurements showed a mediocre level
of pollution. During working hours, the
mean airborne microbial load increased
by over 300%. Bacteraemia is defined
as the presence of bacteria in the blood
(Bandt et al. 1964). If ultrasonic scalers
are used subgingivally, then the aerosol
produced will contain blood contamina-
tion (Barnes et al. 1998).
The health of the dental team may be
compromised by such airborne hazards.
Young female clinical staff are most
susceptible and their symptoms appear
to be related to instruments such as
ultrasonic scalers that generate aerosols
(Allsopp et al. 1997).
Studies have been undertaken to
assess the effectiveness of a high-
volume evacuator attached to the handle
of an ultrasonic scaler. In vitro work has
shown that the use of such a device
produced a 93% reduction in the mean
amount of aerosol contamination (Har-
rel et al. 1996). This has been confirmed
in vivo by the number of microorgan-
isms generated during scaling being
reduced (King et al. 1997). In vitro the
Dentsply manufactured inserts TFI-10
and FSI-10 have been compared with
the use of an aerosol reduction device
fitted to the scaler. The reduction device
consisted of a disposable suction tube
surrounding the handle and part of the
insert. This is connected via a light-
weight flexible hose to a high-volume
evacuator. A 97% reduction in aerosol
was observed for the TFI insert and only
a 72% reduction for the FSI. It was
found that the FSI insert with the use of
a reduction device produced a higher
contamination level when compared to
the TFI (Rivera-Hidalgo et al. 1999). It
has been concluded that a large-bore
high-volume evacuator should be used
in conjunction with ultrasonic scalers to
minimise the danger to dental personnel
of contaminated aerosols (Harrel et al.
1998).
In summary, the use of a pre-
procedural mouth rinse can reduce the
bacterial hazard of the aerosol and a
high-volume evacuator can reduce the
aerosol produced. Further work could
be undertaken to reassess the situation
when both these actions are employed,
to identify if this completely eliminates
the hazard of the bacterial aerosol.
Auditory
Ultrasonic scalers may be a potential
hazard to the auditory system of both
clinicians and patients. Damage to
operator hearing is possible through
airborne subharmonics of the ultrasonic
scaler. For the patient, damage can
occur through the transmission of ultra-
sound through tooth contact to the inner
ear via the bones of the skull. This latter
hazard is a possibility during scaling of
the molar teeth.
Tinnitus is an early sign of hearing
loss and may occur following ultrasonic
scaling. Investigations were conducted
into the effects of ultrasonic scaling on
20 people for 5 min; half of the subjects
experienced temporary shifts in hearing
threshold or tinnitus or both (Möller et
al. 1976). Similar work on a group of 20
subjects produced contradictory find-
ings, in that no temporary threshold
shift or tinnitus effects after a single
dental scaling procedure were evident
(Walmsley et al. 1987a).
A small number of dentists have
experienced tinnitus or numbness of
the ears after the prolonged use of
ultrasonic scalers, which indicates a
small potential risk to hearing (Coles
& Hoare 1985). However, this was not
significant when compared to the nor-
mal population. Noise experienced from
ultrasonic scalers is greater for the
patient than the operator, and hence
staff are unlikely to suffer hearing loss
as a result.
A population study was conducted to
compare the hearing ability of dental
personnel compared with controls (Rah-
ko et al. 1988). There was no significant
difference found between the two po-
pulations, and it was therefore con-
cluded that dental instrumentation was
not harmful to hearing. Work was
conducted with reference to high-speed
air-turbine handpieces, which con-
cluded that hearing damage risk is slight
(Wilson et al. 1990).
The noise levels of various dental
equipment used in four busy clinics were
measured at the operator’s ear (Setcos &
Mahyuddin 1998). They considered a
permissible noise level as 85 dB(A). The
ultrasonic scaler in one clinic was the
only equipment to exceed this level; all
other equipment at all clinics were below
this level. However, it is unclear as to
why only one ultrasonic scaler exceeded
this noise level.
In summary, the ultrasonic scaler has
been shown to cause no permanent harm
to hearing through airborne noise.
Transmission of ultrasound through the
bone may potentially damage the inner
ear, although this has not been demon-
strated. Work is needed to identify if a
potential hazard to hearing exists for the
patient, and if this is an increased
problem for patients who receive reg-
ular ultrasonic scaling.
Cardiac Pacemakers
The proximity of magnetic, electrical or
electromagnetic fields can affect the
operation of cardiac pacemakers. The
handpiece of the ultrasonic scaler pro-
duces an electromagnetic field and the
severity of interference is dependent on
the strength of this field.
Contradictory findings have been
obtained during investigations into the
effect of the ultrasonic scaler on the
pacemaker, giving reports of interfer-
ence (Adams et al. 1982) and no
interference (Simon et al. 1975, Luker
1982). However, all are in agreement
that the piezoelectric ultrasonic scalers
tested did not affect pacemakers.
Recent work investigating the mag-
netostrictive scaler stated that interfer-
ence can be caused if the pacemaker
pacing lead comes within 37.5 cm of the
scaler (Miller et al. 1998). Therefore, it
is advised that ultrasonic scalers should

not be used by operators or on patients
with cardiac pacemakers.
Research is needed in this area to
assess the potential interference of
newer designs of pacemakers as many
now have improved shielding. It is
possible that this problem has been
resolved; however, until further work
is published in this field it must be
assumed that magnetostrictive ultraso-
nic scalers are potentially dangerous for
people with pacemakers.
Summary
The ultrasonic dental scaler is a useful
instrument in the field of periodontol-
ogy, but considerations need to be
made when utilising it in the clinical
situation.
 To eliminate the problems of heating
effects, ultrasonic scalers should not
be used if the irrigant water flow is
below 20 ml/min.
 Cavitation can cause damage to
platelets, which have the potential to
cause pulp death, although in vivo
experiments have shown no signifi-
cant danger of thrombosis.
 Prolonged operation of an ultrasonic
scaler may cause disruption of blood
and nerve supplies to the operator
fingers, although this work is uncon-
firmed.
 To reduce the hazards of aerosols, the
equipment should be used in con-
junction with a pre-procedural anti-
septic mouthrinse and a high-volume
evacuator, and any high-risk infective
patients should be treated with hand
instruments.
 The ultrasonic scaler may produce
temporary hearing shifts in the pa-
tient and clinician, although there is
no evidence of permanent damage.
 Magnetostrictive ultrasonic scalers
should not be used by clinicians or
on patients with a pacemaker.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the En-
gineering and Physical Sciences Re-
search Council (EPSRC Project Grant
No. GR/M75136).
Zusammenfassung
Der dentale Ultraschallscaler: verbundene
Risiken
Hinterkrund: Der dentale Ultraschallscaler ist
ein gebräuchliches Instrument bei der Präven-
tion von parodontalen Erkrankungen, jedoch hat
dieses Gerät eine Anzahl van Risiken, die
mit dem Gebrauch verbunden sind. Dies
schliet ein die Überhitzung des Zahnes
während der Behandlung, Vibrationsrisiken
mit folgender Zellzerstörunt mogliche
Plättchenzerstörungen durch Kavitation, die
mit elektromagnetischen Feldern verbunden
ist, was die Schrittmacher unterbrechen kann,
Hörschäden bein Patienten und Zahnarzt sowie
Freisetzung von gefährlichen bakterienhaltige
Aerosolen.
Ziele: Zusammentragen der publizierten Stu-
dien über die verschiedenen Risiken im Zu-
sammenhang mit dem dentalen Ultraschall-
scaler und Diskussion über möglich zukünftige
Forschungsgebiete.
Datenquellen: Die wissenschaftliche Literatur
wurde unter Nutzung von Web of Science,
EMBASE und Medline zusammengesucht.
Die Arbeiten wurden danach handverlesen,
um nicht passende Publikationen zu eliminie-
ren.
Schlussfolgerungen: Dieser Reviewartikel
führt einige der Forschungen in dem Feld der
verbundenen Risiken zusammen, um ihre Sig-
nifikanz in klinischen Situationen zu bestimmen
sowie Ideen für zukünftige Forschung zu
diskutieren. Vorschläge für Empfehlungen wer-
den gegeben, die zuvor für ihre Eignung zur
Reduktion möglicher Risiken untersucht wur-
den, um das sichere Arbeiten mit dentalen
Ultraschallscalern in der zahnärztlichen Praxis
zu sichem.
Résumé
Le de´tartreur ultrasonique: Risques
associe´s
Contexte: Le détartreur ultrasonique est un
outil intéressant pour la prévention de la
maladie paradontale, mais présente certains
risques avec lesquels il a été associé. Parmi
ces risques, on trouve l’échauffement de la dent
pendant le détartrage, des risques de entraı̂ne
vibration qu entraı̂ne une perturbation cellu-
laire, des dommages plaquettaires par cavita-
tion, de possibles interruption des pace makers
par les champs électro-magnétiques associés,
des dommages auditifs pour le patient et pour le
clinicien et le relargage d’aérosols contenant
des bactéries dangereuses.
Objectif: Collecter les recherches portant sur
les risques varies associes aux détartreurs
ultrasoniques et discuter de possibles axes de
futures recherches.
Sources des données: Une recherche à l’aide
de Web of Science, EMBASE et Medline
fut réalisée dans la littérature scientifique et
le résultat a été étudié manuellement pour
éliminer les articles qui ne relevaient pas de ce
sujet.
Conclusions: Cette revue souligne quelques
recherches conduites sur le sujet des risques
associés afin de préciser leur signification
en situation clinique et de discuter de possible
recherches supplémentaires. Des suggestions
de recommandations, qui ont été préalablement
étudiées pour leur aide à réduire les risques,
sont données, afin d’assurer une utilisation des
détartreurs ultrasoniques en toute sécurité.
Ultrasonic dental scaler 99
References
Adams, D., Fulford, N., Beechy, J., MacCarthy,
J. & Stephens, M. (1982) The cardiac pace-
maker and ultrasonic scalers. British Dental
Journal 152, 171–173.
Akesson, I., Lundborg, G., Horstmann, V. &
Skerving, S. (1995) Neuropathy in female
dental personnel exposed to high frequency
vibrations. Occupational and Environmental
Medicine 52, 116–123.
Allen, E. F. & Rhoads, R. H. (1963) Effects
of high speed periodontol instruments on
tooth surface. Journal of Periodontology 34,
352–356.
Allsopp, J., Basu, M. K., Browne, R. M., Burge,
P. S. & Matthews J, B. (1997) Survey of the
use of personal protective equipment and
prevalence of work related symptoms among
dental staff. Occupational and Environmen-
tal Medicine 54, 125–134.
Badersten, A., Nilveus, R. & Egelberg, J.
(1981) Effect of nonsurgical periodontol
therapy 1. Moderately advanced periodonti-
tis. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 8,
57–72.
Baldissara, P., Catapano, S. & Scotti, R. (1997)
Clinical and histological evaluation of ther-
mal injury thresholds in human teeth: a
preliminary study. Journal of Oral Rehabili-
tation 24, 791–801.
Bandt, C. L., Korn, N. A. & Schaffer, E. M.
(1964) Bacteremias from ultrasonic and hand
instrumentation. Journal of Periodontology
35, 214–215.
Barnes, J. B., Harrel, S. K. & Rivera-Hidalgo,
F. (1998) Blood contamination of the aero-
sols produced by in vivo use of ultrasonic
scalers. Journal of Periodontology 69,
434–438.
Breininger, D. R., O’Leary, T. J. & Blumen-
shine, R. V. H. (1987) Comparative effec-
tiveness of ultrasonic and hand scaling for the
removal of subgingival plaque and calculus.
Journal of Periodontology 58, 9–18.
Burke, F. J. T. & Jacques, S. A. (1993)
Vibration white finger (letters). British Den-
tal Journal 174, 194.
Catuna, M. C. (1953) Sonic energy. Annals of
Dentistry 12, 100.
Chang, J. C. & Wilder-Smith, P. (1998) Laser-
induced thermal events in empty and pulp-
filled dental pulp chambers. Lasers in
Surgery and Medicine 22, 46–50.
Coles, R. A. A. & Hoare, N. W. (1985) Noise-
induced hearing loss and the dentist. British
Dental Journal 159, 209–218.
Crowell, J. A., Kusserow, B. K. & Nyborg, W.
L. (1977) Functional changes in white blood
cells after microsonation. Ultrasound in
Medicine and Biology 3, 185–190.
Ekenvall, L., Nilsson, B. Y. & Falconer, C.
(1990) Sensory perception in the hands of
dentists. Scandinavian Journal of Work and
Environmental Health 16, 334–339.
Ewen, S. J. (1961) The ultrasonic wound –
some observations. Journal of Periodontol-
ogy 32, 315–321.
Fine, D. H., Mendieta, C., Barnett, M. L.,
Furgang, D., Meyers, R., Olshan, A. &
100 Trenter & Walmsley
Vincent, J. (1992) Efficacy of preprocedural
rinsing with an antiseptic in reducing viable
bacteria in dental aerosols. Journal of
Periodontology 63, 821–824.
Fine, D. H., Yip, J., Furgang, D., Barnett, M. L.,
Olshan, A. M. & Vincent, J. (1993) Reducing
bacteria in dental aerosols: pre-procedural
use of an antiseptic mouthrinse. Journal of
the American Dental Association 124, 56–58.
Goldman, H. M. (1960) Curettage by ultrasonic
instrument. Oral Surgery 13, 43–53.
Harrel, S. K., Barnes, J. B. & Rivera-Hidalgo,
F. (1996) Reduction of aerosols produced by
ultrasonic scalers. Journal of Periodontology
67, 28–32.
Harrel, S. K., Barnes, J. B. & Rivera-Hidalgo,
F. (1998) Aerosol and splatter contamination
from the operative site during ultrasonic
scaling. Journal of the American Dental
Association 129, 1241–1249.
Hjortsberg, U., Rosen, I., Orbaek, P., Lundborg,
G. & Balogh, I. (1989) Finger receptor
dysfunction in dental technicians exposed to
high-frequency vibration. Scandinavian
Journal of Work and Environmental Health
15, 339–344.
Holbrook, W. P., Muir, K. F., MacPhee, I. T. &
Ross, P. W. (1978) Bacteriological investiga-
tion of the aerosol from ultrasonic scalers.
British Dental Journal 144, 245–247.
King, T. B., Muzzin, K. B., Berry, C. W. &
Anders, L. M. (1997) The effectiveness of an
aerosol reduction device for ultrasonic sca-
lers. Journal of Periodontology 68, 45–49.
Kocher, T. & Plagmann, H. C. (1996) Heat
propagation in dentin during instrumentation
with different sonic scaler tips. Quintessence
International 27, 259–264.
Kocher, T., Rosin, M., Langenbeck, N. &
Bernhardt, O. (2001) Subgingival polishing
with a Teflon-coated sonic scaler insert in
comparison to conventional instruments as
assessed on extracted teeth (II) Subgingival
roughness. Journal of Clinical Periodontol-
ogy 28, 723–729.
Lee, A., Heasman, P. A. & Kelly, P. J. (1996)
An in vitro comparative study of a recipro-
cating scaler for root surface debridement.
Journal of Dentistry 24, 81–86.
Legnani, P., Checchi, L., Pelliccioni, G. A. &
D’Achille, C. (1994) Atmospheric contam-
ination during dental procedures. Quintes-
sence International 25, 435–439.
Luker, J. (1982) The pacemaker patient in the
dental surgery. Journal of Dentistry 10,
326–332.
Lundström, R. & Lindmark, A. (1982) Effects
of local vibration on tactile perception in the
hands of dentists. Journal of Low Frequency
Noise and Vibration 1, 1–11.
Mallernee, R. E. (1958) The effect of ultrasonic
energy on the periodontal membrane, alveo-
lar bone and gingivae. Journal of Prosthetic
Dentistry 8, 147–152.
McCall, C. M. & Szmyd, L. (1960) Clinical
evaluation of ultrasonic scaling. Journal of
the American Dental Association 61,
559–564.
Micik, R. E., Miller, R. L. & Leong, A. C.
(1971) Studies on dental aerobiology: III.
Efficacy of surgical masks in protecting
dental personnel from airborne bacterial
particles. Journal of Dental Research 50,
626–630.
Milerad, E. & Ekenval, L. (1990) Symptoms of
the neck and upper extremities in dentists.
Scandinavian Journal of Work and Environ-
mental Health 16, 129–134.
Miller, C. S., Leonelli, F. M. & Latham, E.
(1998) Selective interference with pacemaker
activity by electrical dental devices. Oral
Surgery 85, 33–36.
Möller, P., Grevstad, A. O. & Kristofferson, T.
(1976) Ultrasonic scaling of maxillary
teeth causing tinnitus and temporary hearing
shifts. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 3,
123–127.
Nicoll, B. K. & Peters, R. J. (1998) Heat
generation during ultrasonic instrumentation
of dentin as affected by different irrigation
methods. Journal of Periodontology 69,
884–888.
Nyborg, H. & Brannstrom, M. (1968) Pulp
reaction to heat. Journal of Prosthetic
Dentistry 19, 605–612.
Olgart, L., Edwall, L. & Gazelius, B. (1991)
Involvement of afferent nerves in pulpal
blood-flow reactions in response to clinical
and experimental procedures in the cat.
Archives of Oral Biology 36, 575–581.
Pameijer, C. H., Stallard, R. E. & Hiep, N.
(1972) Surface characteristics of teeth fol-
lowing periodontal instrumentation: a scan-
ning electron microscope study. Journal of
Periodontology 43, 628–633.
Rahko, A. A., Karma, P. H., Rahko, K. T. &
Kataja, M. J. (1988) High-frequency hearing
of dental personnel. Community Dentistry
and Oral Epidemiology 16, 268–270.
Rischer, C. E. & Easton, T. A. (1992) Focus on
human biology. New York: Harper Collins,
ISBN 0-06-045416-4.
Rivera-Hidalgo, F., Barnes, J. B. & Harrel, S.
K. (1999) Aerosol & splatter production by
focused spray and standard ultrasonic scalers.
Journal of Periodontology 70, 473–477.
Sanderson, A. D. (1966) Gingival curettage by
hand and ultrasonic instruments: a histologi-
cal comparison. Journal of Periodontology
37, 279–290.
Schaffer, E. M., Stende, G. & King, D. (1964)
Healing of periodontol pocket tissues follow-
ing ultrasonic scaling and hand planing.
Journal of Periodontology 35, 140–148.
Setcos, J. C. & Mahyuddin, A. (1998) Noise
levels encountered in dental clinical and
laboratory practice. International Journal of
Prosthodontics 11, 150–157.
Simon, A. B., Linde, B., Bonnette, G. H. &
Schlentz, R. J. (1975) The individual with a
pacemaker in the dental environment. Jour-
nal of the American Dental Association 91,
1224–1229.
Sorrin, S. & Ewen, S. J. (1965) Ultrasonics in
periodontics. New York State Dental Journal
31, 277–284.
Street, E. V. (1959) A critical evaluation of
ultrasonics in dentistry. Journal of Prosthetic
Dentistry 9, 132–141.
Suppipat, N. (1974) Ultrasonics in periodontics.
Journal of Clinical Periodontology 1,
206–213.
Torfason, T., Selvig, K. A. & Egelberg, J.
(1979) Clinical improvement of gingival
conditions following ultrasonic versus hand
instrumentation of periodontol pockets. Jour-
nal of Clinical Periodontology 6, 165–176.
Verez-Fraguela, J. L., Valles, M. A. V. &
Calvo, L. J. E. (2000) Effects of ultrasonic
dental scaling on pulp vitality in dogs: an
experimental study. Journal of Veterinary
Dentistry 17, 75–79.
Walmsley, A. D. (1988) Potential hazards of the
dental ultrasonic descaler. Ultrasound in
Medicine and Biology 14, 15–20.
Walmsley, A. D., Hickson, F. S., Laird, W. R.
E. & Williams, A. R. (1987a) Investigation
into patients’ hearing following ultrasonic
scaling. British Dental Journal 162,
221–224.
Walmsley, A. D., Laird, W. R. E. & Williams,
A. R. (1984) A model system to demonstrate
the role of cavitational activity in ultrasonic
scaling. Journal of Dental Research 63,
1162–1165.
Walmsley, A. D., Laird, W. R. E. & Williams,
A. R. (1987b) Intra-vascular thrombosis
associated with dental ultrasound. Journal
of Oral Pathology 16, 256–259.
Walmsley, A. D., Laird, W. R. E. & Williams,
A. R. (1988) Dental plaque removal by
cavitational activity during ultrasonic scal-
ing. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 15,
539–543.
Walmsley, A. D., Williams, A. R. & Laird, W.
R. E. (1986) Acoustic absorption within
human teeth during ultrasonic descaling.
Journal of Dentistry 14, 2–6.
Walmsley, A. D., Walsh, T. F., Laird, W. R. E.
& Williams, A. R. (1990) Effects of cavita-
tional activity on the root surface of teeth
during ultrasonic scaling. Journal of Clinical
Periodontology 17, 306–312.
Williams, A. R. (1974) Release of serotonin
from human platelets by acoustic micro-
streaming. Journal of the Acoustical Society
of America 56, 1640–1643.
Williams, A. R. (1977) Intravascular mural
thrombi produced by acoustic microstream-
ing. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology 3,
191–203.
Williams, A. R. & Chater, B. V. (1980)
Mammilian platelet damage in vitro by an
ultrasonic therapeutic device. Archives of
Oral Biology 25, 175–179.
Williams, A. R., Hughes, D. E. & Nyborg, W.
L. (1970a) Hemolysis near a transversely
oscillating wire. Science 169, 871–873.
Williams Gross, K. B., Overman, P. R., Cobb,
C. & Brockmann, S. (1992) Aerosol genera-
tion by two ultrasonic scalers and one sonic
scaler. Journal of Dental Hygiene 66,
314–318.
Williams, G. H., Pollok, N. L., Shay, D. E. &
Barr, C. E. (1970b) Laminar air purge of
microorganisms in dental aerosols: prophy-
lactic procedures with the ultrasonic
scaler. Journal of Dental Research 49,
1498–1504.

Williams, A. R., Walmsley, A. D. & Laird, W.
R. E. (1985) Pulpal temperature increases
during ultrasonic scaling due to acoustic
absorption within the tooth. Journal of
Dental Research 64, 678.
Wilson, C. E., Vaidyanathan, T. K., Cinotti, W.
R., Cohen, S. M. & Wang, S. J. (1990)
Hearing-damage risk and communication
interference in dental practice. Journal of
Dental Research 69, 489–493.
Zach, L. & Cohen, G. (1965) Pulp response to
externally applied heat. Oral Surgery 19,
515–530.
Zinner, D. D. (1955) Recent ultrasonic dental
studies, including periodontia, without the
use of an abrasive. Journal of Dental
Research 34, 748–749.
Ultrasonic dental scaler 101
Address:
Professor A. Damien Walmsley
The School of Dentistry
The University of Birmingham
St Chad’s Queensway, Birmingham B4 6NN, UK
Fax: 144 (0)121 237 2813
email: a.d.walmsley@bham.ac.uk