Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Amalgam dental materials
Mercury dental amalgam essay
Amalgam dental materials
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Amalgam dental materials
The Effects of Dental Amalgam on the Environment
The disposal of dental amalgam, specifically the mercury component, has become a controversial topic in the past twenty years. Due to the concern this issue brings, many studies have taken place regarding the effect of mercury on the environment and in humans.
Amalgam is the most common material used in restorative dentistry due to its low cost, ease of use and stability (Chin et al., 2000). The basic ingredients include silver, tin, copper and mercury. Mercury is the most abundant component in amalgam and can be toxic in different forms, such as dust or vapor (Drummond, Cailas & Croke, 2003).
Amalgam waste is generated during placement and replacement of restorative materials. There are two types of amalgam waste: contact and non-contact amalgam. Contact amalgam includes amalgam that has been in contact with the tooth surface. Non-contact amalgam includes excess material that was either not placed in the restoration or left in the capsule that the amalgam came in. Contact amalgam accounts for the majority of the contaminants in dental waste water, while non-contact amalgam is recyclable and can be used for refinement (Drummond et al., 2003)
Non-contact amalgam is not considered to be a health hazard if stored and recycled properly. The mercury component can be hazardous in a dust or vapor form. To prevent detrimental effects from the vapor, amalgam should be stored in an airtight container. This scrap amalgam should also be stored in a liquid, which will prevent the breakdown of amalgam into its components. Water is the most common liquid used but radiographic fixer is considered to be more effective for amalgam storage and the prevention of degradation (Chin...
... middle of paper ...
...., & Meyer, D. M. (2006). Evaluating amalgam separators
using an international standard. The Journal of the American Dental Association, 137, 999-1005.
Chin, G., Chong, J., Kluczewska, A., Lau, A., Gorjy, S., & Tennant, M. (2000). The
environmental effects of dental amalgam. Australian Dental Journal, 45(4), 246-249.
Drummond, J. L., Cailas, M. D., & Croke, K. (2003). Mercury generation potential from dental
waste amalgam. Journal of Dentistry, 31, 493-501.
Jokstad, A., & Fan, P. L. (2006). Amalgam waste management. International Dental Journal,
56, 147-153.
Jones, D. W. (2004). Putting dental mercury pollution into perspective. British Dental Journal,
197(4), 175-177.
Mohapatra, S. P., Nikolova, I., & Mitchell, A. (2007). Managing mercury in the great lakes: An
analytical review of abatement policies. Journal of Environmental Management, 83, 80-92.
Thesis Statement: Concerns for water fluoridation stem from the toxicity of fluoride, the dangers fluoride pose to the body, and equal declining tooth decay seen for fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries.
Although pure BPA is not utilized in dental resins, it has been demonstrated that bis-DMA has the ability to be hydrolyzed into BPA by salivary esterases.1 This is a potential cause for concern due to the many adverse health effects associated with BPA. These effects are presumably due to the ability of BPA to bind to nuclear estrogen receptors and interfere with endocrine signaling.1 Thus, it is of interest to determine the estrogenic potential of dental resins over time.
Dental amalgam is a commonly used restorative material that contains mercury and is of particular concern due to the potential detrimental effects it has on both the environment and humans (Chin et al, 2000). Some of the generated amalgam-contaminated sludge is released into the sewage system. Extracted or missing teeth that contain amalgam fillings as well as amalgam-contaminated waste, like trituration capsules and cotton rolls are expelled along with solid waste and often incinerated as well (Chin et al, 2000). The negative ramifications associated with dental mercury usage is on large a result of poor management of dental amalgam waste (Chin et al, 2000). To address these concerns, health professionals have attempted to implement programs that promote positive environmental action. For example, the DCW (Dentists for Cleaner Water) program involves the installation of dental amalgam separators with further measures put in place to decrease dental amalgam waste entering the water system by 95% (Adavb.net, 2016). To reduce waste, dentists are encouraged to slightly modify their usual habits such as purchasing in bulk, limiting single use items and setting printers for double-sided and greyscale printing. It is important for health professionals to be aware of the potential ecological and public health risks associated with
Ceramics are most commonly used in dental applications as restorative materials for crowns, cements and dentures.
The quality of dental unit water is of considerable importance to patients and dental health care providers because they are exposed to water and aerosols generated from the dental unit during routine practice. (5,6) The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—a US federal agency—and the American Dental Association have recommended that the output water from (DUWLs) should
Zhang, Y. B., Harwood, J., Williams, A., Ylänne-McEwen, V., Wadleigh, P. M., & Thimm, C.
In the same study Tjaderhane suggested that, a considerably low concentration of dimethyl sulfoxide was shown to reduce dentin bond strength loss after aging. Considering di-methyl sulfoxide properties, higher concentrations might have a positive effect on dentin bonding. [21]
Wechsler, Henry, PhD, Jae Eun Lee, DrPH, Toben F. Nelson, MS, and Meichun Kuo, ScD.
Ottenberg, A. L., Wu, J. T., Poland, G. A., Jacobson, R. M., Koenig , B. A., & Tilburt, J. C.
Kobau, R., Zack, M. M., Manderscheid, R., Palpant, R. G., Morales, D. S., Luncheon, C., et al.
Vahey, C. D., Aiken, H. L., Sloane, M. D., Clarke, P. S., and Vargas, D. (2010 Jan. 15).
Wood, W. M., Karvonen, M., Test, D. W., Browder, D., & Algozzine, B. (2004). Promoting
Molinari, J., & Hart, J. (2010). How to Choose and Use Environmental Surface Disinfectants. Cottone's Practical Infection Control in Dentistry (Third Edition ed., pp. 185- 193). Philadelphia: Wolters Kumar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Teeth #1, 16, and 17 are unerupted. There is a PFM on tooth #22. There were two 3-unit bridges: teeth #19 through 21 with a gold abutment on tooth #19, the pontic on tooth #20 and a PFM abutment on tooth #21, as well as on teeth #23 through 25, with PFM abutments on teeth #23 and 25, and the pontic on tooth #24. The amalgam restorations are as follows: an MO on tooth #2 and an MOD on teeth #3 and 5. There are cervical composites on teeth #3 and 4. Tooth #15 was missing the crown. Tooth #13 was a root tip. There are class two furcations on the lingual surface of teeth #1, 18, and 19, and a class one furcation on the buccal surface of tooth #18. There is 2mm of recession on the facial surfaces of teeth #4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 29, 25, 26, and 27, as well as the lingual surfaces of teeth #3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 21, 22, 26, 27. There is 4mm of recession on the facial surfaces of teeth #3 and 23, as well as the lingual surfaces of teeth #12, 23, and 25. There is 6mm of recession on the facial surface of tooth #22. Teeth #3, 4, 18, 26, and 27 had attrition. There was erosion on the lingual and incisal surfaces of teeth #8 through
Hill, T.F., & Nabors, L.A., & Reynolds, M.W., & Wallace, J., & Weist, M.D. (2001). The