0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Detection Methods Human Health Effects Remediation Sign in to save

Negative Impact of Dental Wastewater on the Environment and Human Health: A Scoping Review

Water Environment Research 2025 Score: 48 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Giordana Picolo Furini, Rafaela Munz Belarmino, Lilian Rigo

Summary

This scoping review analyzed evidence on dental wastewater as a source of environmental and health risks, finding that it contains physical, chemical, and microbiological hazards — including plastic particles from dental materials — that are inadequately managed in most healthcare settings.

Study Type Environmental

This study aimed to analyze evidence on the physical, chemical, and microbiological risks associated with dental wastewater (DWW) and its impact on the environment and human health. As part of a scoping review, we searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for studies that described DWW management, characterization, filtration, and associated risks. The search was limited to studies published in English, including experimental, laboratory, observational studies, and reviews. We extracted the study design, country of origin, sample location, components, objectives, and results. Using VOSviewer software, an analysis of author coauthorship and keyword co-occurrence was conducted. Environmental and human risks were examined, and strategies to minimize damage were discussed. The search initially yielded 1967 articles until June 2024. After removing duplicates and applying exclusion criteria, 29 articles were selected for inclusion. Most studies (55.1%) were experimental, with heavy metals being the most frequently studied pollutants (60%), particularly mercury (Hg). Microbiological analyses appeared in six studies (20.6%), and bisphenol A in two studies (6.9%). The environmental pollutant potential of DWW was reported in 22 studies (75.8%), while only five studies (17.2%) documented risks to humans. In conclusion, DWW poses significant environmental hazards due to its toxic composition and pollutant potential. Although evidence on human health risks is still limited and fragmented, preliminary findings suggest possible concerns that warrant attention. These results highlight the urgent need for more comprehensive studies and support the implementation of regulatory and management strategies to mitigate environmental and potential human health impacts.

Share this paper