Infection Control

In dentistry, many clinicians still fall into a dangerous trap:
“If my regulatory body didn’t explicitly say to do it, then I don’t have to do it.”

This mindset shows up most often with instrument package labelling, documentation, chart entries, and sterilization traceability. Some clinicians insist:

• “My IPAC guideline doesn’t say I must label packages.”
• “It doesn’t specifically say to write sterilization data in the patient chart.”
• “It doesn’t use the exact words ‘track’ or ‘trace,’ so why should I?”

But here’s the truth, just because your regulator doesn’t list every micro-step does NOT mean you are exempt from performing it. Your responsibility is to use professional judgement and follow recognized IPAC standards to protect patient safety. Let’s explore why.

Regulatory Bodies Cannot Write a Step-by-Step Manual for Every Clinic

No

Over the past week, I’ve received several emails from dental professionals asking about information they received during various IPAC sessions within the dental community, specifically around the placement and use of the Type V chemical indicator (CI).

Two common questions have emerged:

1. Is a Class IV CI in a cassette sufficient?
2. If a Class V is placed in all cassettes, is there still a need for a Type V in a Process Challenge Device (PCD)?

These questions are important. They show that people are listening, engaging, and wanting to do things right. But they also highlight why dismantling received information and fact-checking for evidence is essential in infection prevention and control (IPAC).

1. The Risk of Passive Acceptance

In the IPAC world, information travels quickly, especially when it’s shared confidently or

In a dental setting, we habitually talk about “Infection prevention,” “sterilization,” and “barrier protection.” But as pathogens evolve, or as outbreaks resurge, it’s worth revisiting some fundamentals in an era of stronger pathogens: what “stronger bugs” we might face, what disinfectants actually eliminate them, and what personal protective equipment (PPE) is needed when you’re using more potent chemicals.

Viral mutations, global travel, and environmental pressures have contributed to more resilient microorganisms and more frequent re-emergence of previously controlled diseases — for example, measles. To meet these challenges, dentistry has responded with broad-spectrum, hospital-grade disinfectants capable of neutralizing the toughest microbial threats. But that same chemical strength demands an equally strong commitment to safe handling and appropriate PPE.

Understanding “Stronger Bugs”: Viruses, Bacteria, and Benchmark Organisms

Not all microorga

For decades, the aluminum foil test has been the go-to method for checking ultrasonic cleaners in dental, medical, and laboratory settings. It’s simple, inexpensive, and provides a visual confirmation that cavitation, the core cleaning action of an ultrasonic unit, is happening. But as our understanding of infection prevention and control has evolved, so too has the need for more accurate, clinically relevant verification methods.

The truth is, while the foil test might tell you that your ultrasonic unit is producing bubbles, it can’t tell you whether it’s actually cleaning instruments to the standard required for patient safety. This is where soil indicators come in.

The Limits of the Foil Test

The foil test works by running the ultrasonic cycle with pieces of aluminum foil suspended in the tank, then inspecting for pitting or perfo

As infection control standards continue to evolve, dental professionals are seeking tools that not only meet today’s requirements but anticipate tomorrow’s demands. The maxill Process Challenge Device (PCD) stands out as a future-ready, cost-effective, and scientifically grounded solution for validating sterilizer performance in dental settings.

Designed for Real-World Sterilization Challenges

The maxill PCD is engineered to replicate one of the most difficult sterilization scenarios in dentistry: a narrow lumen, prioritizing clinical specificity over general simulation. This deliberate design closely mirrors the internal geometry of dental handpieces, ultrasonic sleeves, hollow mirror handles, and air polisher handpieces, equipment that demands the highest level of sterilization assurance.

You might ask, why not use a flat, square, or rectangular PCD

In dentistry, and especially in infection prevention and control (IPAC), the term “best practice” is often misunderstood. Many assume it's an optional extra, something aspirational or “above and beyond” the standards. But in reality, best practice is not about going beyond the standards, it's about fully meeting them through a responsible, evidence-informed, and risk-managed approach.

Let me explain.

When we say “best practice,” what we really mean is: meeting the standards with accountability. Best practice is about taking the regulatory standards and interpreting them through the lens of risk management, tailoring them to your specific clinical environment. It's not an abstract concept or a luxury for high-end clinics. It is the professional duty of every regulated health professional.

Why Standards Sound Vague—And Why That's Intentional

Often, standards are written broadly. This is not becaus

In the world of dental infection prevention and control (IPAC), the terms *guidelines* and *standards* are often used as if they mean the same thing. But should they be? And more importantly … does it matter?

Yes, it matters. A lot.

What's the Difference?

Standards are formal, enforceable requirements set by regulatory bodies. They are the minimum expectations for safe and ethical practice. Meeting these standards is not optional—they are legally binding, and failing to comply can lead to professional consequences, including disciplinary action or loss of license.

Guidelines, on the other hand, are recommendations. They are typically developed by public health agencies, expert panels, or research organizations. While not enforceable on their own, guidelines represent current best practices and offer direction on how to implement standards effectively and safely.

Why Are They Confused?

What is the Financial Worth of Each Operatory?

Every operatory in a dental practice represents a significant source of revenue. Based on minimum daily production estimates:

• A hygiene operatory generates at least $1,800 per day.
• A DDS operatory generates at least $3,000 per day.

Beyond direct production, every operatory also carries associated labour costs. In this analysis, we account for:

• Registered Dental Hygienists (RDH) @ $400 per day
• Certified Dental Assistants (CDA) @ $200 per day
• Administrative staff (Admin) @ $200 per day

This basic model does not include:

• Percentages paid to associate dentists
• Salaries for office managers
• Additional costs for percentages paid to specialists

Understanding the True Cost of Non-Compliance

In the dental field, maintaining a sterile environment is crucial to ensuring patient safety and preventing the spread of infectious diseases. One of the fundamental practices that can significantly impact infection control is proper donning (putting on) and doffing (taking off) of personal protective equipment (PPE). In this blog, we’ll explore why these practices are essential for dental professionals, provide step-by-step instructions for both donning and doffing and highlight key tips to keep in mind.

The Importance of Proper Donning and Doffing

The mouth can be a breeding ground for harmful bacteria and viruses, making it imperative for dental professionals to take the necessary precautions. The correct donning and doffing of PPE help to:

• Protect Patients and Staff: Wearing proper PPE safeguards b