[摘要]目的探讨2种不同的干预措施对洁牙时气溶胶和飞沫在不同距离时的污染程度。方法采用空气自然沉降法进行气溶胶和飞沫采样，试验组使用具有吸唾功能的开口器，对照组使用常规强负压吸唾管，在患者头部高度的正前方、左侧、右侧各50、100、150 cm处放置营养琼脂平板共9块，在洁牙开始前，开始后30、60 min，结束后10 min分别采样4次；并在结束后对医生的口罩和办公台面进行物体表面采样，进行菌落数计数和菌种分类鉴定。结果在相同方位的50、100 cm距离处洁牙30、60 min后的样本细菌菌落数上，试验组和对照组间的差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)；在相同方位的150 cm处洁牙30、60 min后的样本细菌菌落数上，试验组和对照组间的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；试验组医生的口罩与办公台面细菌落数分别为(1 493±35.73)、(1 538±71.85)CFU·m-3，明显低于对照组的(2 828±59.51)、(3 073±74.27)CFU·m-3；气溶胶和飞沫中查见最常见的病原菌：嗜麦芽糖寡养单胞菌、人苍白杆菌、微球菌属等。结论使用具有吸唾功能的开口器能更有效地控制气溶胶和飞沫的传播。

    [关键词]口腔诊室；气溶胶；飞沫；医院感染

    [中图分类号]R 78[文献标志码]A[doi]10.3969/j.issn.1673-5749.2012.04.008

    Detection and analysis of aerosols and droplets in the ultrasonic scalerShu Xiangyun1, Lin Dongxiao1, Li Lili2, Chen Lixuan1, Jiang Ai1, Zhou Liwen1, Gao Yongbo1.(1. Dept. of Stomatology, Longgang District Central Hospital of Shenzhen, Shenzhen 518116, China; 2. Dept. of Infection Control, Hospital of Stomatology, Jilin University, Changchun 130041, China)

    [Abstract]ObjectiveTo determine two different interventions and understand pollution levels of aerosols and droplets in the air at different distances. MethodsUsed the air natural sedimentation to take sample of the aerosols and droplets, experimental group used the opening with aspirator function, control group used the strong negative pressure to attract intervention. Fall out samples were collected with nutritious agar plates placed in nine different spots, in front, left, right 50, 100, 150 cm from head height of the patient. Took the samples for four times, before cleaning teeth, 30 min and 60 min after the start, 10 min after cleaning teeth; took the samples of doctor’s mask and office table surface at the end, and appraisalled the number of colonies and species classification. ResultsThere were significant differences between experimental and control groups, samples of which had bacterial colony counts, which were collected at 30, 60 min after cleaning teeth, 50, 100 cm in the same orientation. The difference was statistically significant(P<0.01). There were significant differences between the experimental and control groups, samples of which had bacterial colony counts, which were collected at 30, 60 min after cleaning teeth, 150 cm in the same orientation. The difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Bacterial colonies of doctor’s masks and office countertops of experimental group were(1 493±35.73),(1 538±71.85)CFU·m-3, significantly lower than the control group, bacterial colonies of which were(2 828±59.51),(3 073±74.27)CFU·m-3. The found pathogenic microorganisms were identified as Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Ochrobactrum anthropi, micrococcus and so on. ConclusionAspirator openings can more effectively control the spread of aerosols and droplets. ......