4222018 Magnetostictive vs. Plezoelectie: Survey compares merits of ultrasonic Scalers ~ Registered Dental Hygienist
Magnetostrictive vs. Piezoelectric:
Survey compares merits of ultrasonic
scalers
November 14, 2016
scaler) operate at a frequency of 3,000 to 8,000 hertz (i.e., cycles per second; Hz). They attach
to the dental unit's high-speed handpiece tubing and are driven by compressed air. Ultrasonic
scalers operate at a higher frequency of about 20 to 50 kilohertz (kHz) and may be either
magnetostrictive or piezoelectric. They are typically portable units. A significant benefit of
ultrasonic scalers over sonic scalers is the water lavage that deplaques and washes away
debris in the periodontal pocket. Additionally, cavitation occurs when bubbles form in the
water stream, When these bubbles collapse, they disrupt the cell walls of harmful bacteria.
Sonic scalers do not cause cavitation.
hitpsshwwrdhmag.comiaticlsiprintvelume-dBfissue-11/contentsimagnetostitve-vs-piezoslectc.himl 184222018 Magnetostictive vs. Plezoelectie: Survey compares merits of ultrasonic Scalers ~ Registered Dental Hygienist
Tie RUeeouieeses
Magnetostrictive Piezoelectric
Frequency 20~ 40 kHz 29-sokbe
Stroke Pattern Elliptical Unear
+
Energy Conversion Metal rod or tack of Crystals activated by
metal sheets cceramichandpiece
Power Dispersion __Allsurfaces active Only active on lateral sides
Magnetostrictive (available from Dentsply and Parkell) and piezoelectric (available from EMS
and Hu-Friedy) power scalers are the two types of ultrasonic devices seen in dental hygiene
practice. Both have been clearly proven to be effective for calculus and stain removal. They
also both have a variety of inserts for various needs such as removing heavy deposits, root
planing, etc. The differences lie in how the two devices function. Magnetostrictive power
scalers operate at an optimal frequency of 20 kHz to 40 kHz, whereas piezoelectric power
scalers operate at a slightly higher optimal frequency of 29 kHz to 50 kHz. In magnetostrictive
scalers, energy is converted to vibrations from the elliptical stroke patterns of the unit's metal
rod or stack of metal sheets. All surfaces of the tip are active in the removal of debris. For the
piezoelectric scaler, strokes occur in a linear pattern via crystals activated by the ceramic
handpiece. Only the lateral sides are effective in the removal of debris.
and discomfort to the patient. Therefore, the tip should never be applied directly on the tooth
surface. The face of the tip produces the second greatest amount of vibrations. The back of
the tip produces less energy than the point or face. The lateral surfaces of the tip produce less
energy than the point or the face and are most often used during power scaling.
The energy dispersion for the piezoelectric scaler differs from that of the magnetostrictive
scaler, as only the lateral sides are effective. The most effective portion of the tip is the last 2.4
mm and can be compared to a Gracey curette.
Magnetostrictive advantages-All magnetostrictive inserts are universal regardless of the
manufacturer, whereas piezo tips are not. Small piezo tips need to be inserted into the
handpiece with a special tool and can easily be misplaced. The magnetostrictive handpiece
maintains greater infection control than the piezo handpiece as less of itis in direct contact
with the patient's mouth. As previously mentioned, another advantage is that all sides of the
magnetostrictive tip may be used for removing deposits, unlike the piezo.
hitpsshwwwrdhmag.comiaticlsiprintvlume-d6fissue-1 /contentsimagnetostitve-vs-piezelectc.himl 264222018 Magnetostictive vs. Plezoelectie: Survey compares merits of ultrasonic Scalers ~ Registered Dental Hygienist
Piezoelectric advantages-The piezo requires less water to control heat. It may be more
comfortable for patients with breathing conditions such as asthma and chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease. The piezo can also be used on all patients with pacemakers, whereas
magnetostrictive scalers may not. Older-style pacemakers do not include a shield, so the
magnetism from the scaler could interfere with their operation. A thorough medical review to
determine if the patient has an older pacemaker is critical. It may require a call to the
physician if the patient is unsure.
Metal stacks on magnetostrictive inserts can be easily bent, which could impair vibration and
overall function. This is not an issue for the piezo. The piezoelectric handpiece is also wider
and therefore more ergonomically designed than the thinner magnetostrictive one. Since the
entire handpiece does not vibrate, there may be greater tactile sensitivity with the piezo.
Clinic patients' preferences
With 20 patients included in our patient requirements at Eastern Florida State College, we did
a study of our own. We wanted to test the theory that the patients would prefer the
piezoelectric scaler over the magnetostrictive because of the decreased water output and
vibrations. Before the study, we ensured that all inserts and equipment were adequate and
passed manufacturers’ guidelines. During the study we used the same clinician, equal power
Some patients in favor of the piezo did prefer the decreased water output and vibrations.
Patients in favor of the magnetostrictive were indifferent to the water output but believed the
vibrations were actually more comfortable than those of the piezoelectric scaler.
We next did a simulation on a typodont with imitation calculus to compare effectiveness and
efficiency of calculus removal. For the calculus we used equal parts of plaster of Paris, paint
thickener, water based paint, and shellac. We placed it uniformly on the facials of the twelve
anterior teeth and let it dry overnight. We then used the same clinician, 66% of each
machine's maximum power, and the 100 tip insert for each. Our results revealed that the
piezoelectric scaler took nine minutes and 25 seconds to remove the imitation calculus from
the six left side anteriors, while the magnetostrictive scaler only took 3 minutes and 37
seconds for the right side!
Although piezoelectric ultrasonic power scalers tend to have the reputation of being superior
with respect to patient comfort, our study has presented that this is often not the case.
Through our research, the magnetostrictive power scaler has proven its ability to be more
hitpsshwwwrdhmag.comiaticlsiprintvlume-d6fissue-1 /contentsimagnetostitve-vs-piezelectc.himl a6ananore Mognetostcve ve. Plezoelecre: Suvey compares merts of urasone scaler - Registered Dental Hygienist
effective with time management. We understand, however, that the piezo will prove itself to
be the preferred choice in certain situations. For example, if a dental practice has a large
patient base from the geriatric population, conditions such as COPD and pacemakers are
commonplace. In this scenario, if given the choice of power scalers, the piezoelectric would be
preferred. In your typical general practice, however, it appears that magnetostrictive scalers
are superior overall. Based on our results, we conclude that what is trending is not necessarily
superior; what is most important is effectiveness, patient comfort, and clinician efficiency.
Hygienists’ preferences for scalers
We conducted a survey through Survey Monkey via e-mail and social media. The majority of
the 40 hygienists who responded to the survey are currently practicing in or near Brevard
County, Florida
81% surveyed said they use only magnetostrictive scalers in their dental office. 4% said they
use only piezoelectric, and 15% reported using both. Of these same hygienists surveyed, 65%
stated their employer is not open to purchasing their preferred scaler. Some employers
believe there is an extra cost for the piezo. Sometimes this is true, but in our research, we
were able to find many comparably priced piezoelectric scalers. While there are many models
to choose from for each type, we have shown a typical piezo and magnetostrictive scaler one
might find in any standard general practice. Prices vary greatly, but we found the average to
understand that employers are not willing to change devices with each hygienist that comes
to the practice. Most hygienists will need to adapt to the equipment that is available. This can
lead to confusion and improper use of the devices if the principles of operation are not clearly
understood.
In the survey, we also asked hygienists which power scaler they believe removes calculus
more effectively:
+ 33% believed the magnetostrictive did
* 4% believed the piezoelectric did
+ 37% believed that both were approximately equal
* 26% were unsure
* 89% reported having a preference to magnetostricitive over piezoelectric
* 11% reported having a preference to piezoelectric over magnetostricitive
hitpsshwwwrdhmag.comiaticlsiprintvlume-d6fissue-1 /contentsimagnetostitve-vs-piezelectc.himl 464222018 Magnetostictive vs. Plezoelectie: Survey compares merits of ultrasonic Scalers ~ Registered Dental Hygienist
There was a wide variety of explanations for each preference. Some hygienists surveyed have
never had the opportunity to use the piezo. Some hygienists like that all sides of the
magnetostrictive inserts can be used. Others say there are more tip choices for the
magnetostrictive, but we have found that many are actually made for use with the piezo; they
are perhaps just not as widely available for purchase with all manufacturers. Lastly, many
hygienists believe that magnetostrictive tips adapt better to the tooth.
Those in favor of the piezo believe that patients are more comfortable with the piezo due to
the mild vibrations and decreased water output. Some believe piezos are becoming "the way
of the future," as they are already very popular in areas such as Europe and South America,
and are becoming increasingly so in the United States. In our survey, we inquired about the
opinion on patient preference. 75% of our community hygienists believed that if given the
choice, patients would prefer the piezoelectric power scaler over the magnetostrictive power
scaler.
Rachel Kelly, CRDH, BS, obtained her bachelor of science in biology from the University of
Central Florida in Orlando and is a recent graduate from the dental hygiene program from
Eastern Florida State College in Cocoa. Rachel currently resides in Palm Bay, Fla., and works
for a wonderful growing private practice in Melbourne, Fla. Karissa Sebero, CRDH, CDA, is a
References
1. Matsuda SA. Achieve Success with Ultrasonic Therapy. Dimensions of Dental Hygiene
website.
http://www.dimensionsofdentalhygiene.com/2013/09_September/in_Brief/Achieve_ Succ
Published September 2013. Accessed August 29, 2016,
2. Miller KR. Good, good, good...Good vibrations! RDH magazine website.
good-vibrations.html, Accessed August 29, 2016.
3. Nield-Gehrig JS. Fundamentals of Periodontal Instrumentation and Advanced Root
Instrumentation, 7th ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
4, Prater SL. Ultrasonic techniques. RDH magazine website.
http:/www,rdhmag,com/articles/print/volume-34/issue-5/features/ultrasonic-
techniques.html, Accessed August 29, 2016.
hitpsshwwwrdhmag.comiaticlsiprintvlume-d6fissue-1 /contentsimagnetostitve-vs-piezelectc.himl 564222018 Magnetostictive vs. Plezoelectie: Survey compares merits of ultrasonic Scalers ~ Registered Dental Hygienist
RDH
SCORES eC)
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74112
PH: 800.331.4633
eee PERN Rel rls
ved. Terms and Conditio
TOPICS
Ce iCs rr
Tres Bac)
Confer
Ct)
een earns
Ok
Li A
ting
rou
oat
co
OPT ieee)
Tan oir
en
coy
PMSA Niel Ud
Pres)
Dental
COVE aid
Teele ect gs
hitpssiwwrdhmag.comiaticlsiprintvelume-d6fissue-11/contentsimagnetostitive-vs-piezoelectc.himl
a6