Thursday, August 6, 2020

FDA Updates List of Dangerous and/or Ineffective Hand Sanitizers




In a post I made not too terribly long ago, I listed brands of hand sanitizers that contained methanol, which is an alcohol type that can be absorbed through the skin and cause serious health problems.

This story has continued to grow.  Now the FDA has discovered that in addition to methanol, some companies are not providing adequate levels of isopropyl or ethyl alcohol to effectively kill viruses and bacteria.  The CDC (Centers for Disease Control) advised that ABHR (Alcohol Based Hand Rubs) have an alcohol content of 60%-95% to effectively inactivate bacteria and viruses.  However, it appears that, despite labeling, many companies are not using an effective amount of alcohol.

In an effort to keep my readers informed and safe, here is the most current list I could find of products to avoid:


  • Blumen Clear Advanced Hand Sanitizer with 70% Alcohol
  • Blumen Advanced Instant Hand Sanitizer Clear Ethyl Alcohol 70%
  • BLUMEN Advanced Instant Hand Sanitizer Clear
  • BLUMEN Advanced Instant Hand Sanitizer Clear
  • KLAR AND DANVER Instant Hand Sanitizer
  • MODESA Instant Hand Sanitizer Moisturizers and Vitamin E
  • BLUMEN Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • BLUMEN Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • BLUMEN Advanced Hand Sanitizer Aloe
  • BLUMEN Advanced Instant Hand Sanitizer Lavender
  • BLUMEN Clear Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • BLUMEN Clear Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • BLUMEN Clear LEAR Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • BLUMEN Clear LEAR Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • The Honeykeeper Hand Sanitizer
  • BLUMEN Advanced Hand Sanitizer Clear
  • BLUMEN Clear Advanced Instant Hand Sanitizer
  • BLUMEN Clear Advanced Instant Hand Sanitizer Aloe
  • BLUMEN Clear Advanced Instant Hand Sanitizer Lavender
  • BLUMEN Aloe Advanced Hand Sanitizer, with 70 Alcohol
  • BLUMEN Aloe Advanced Hand Sanitizer, with 70 Alcohol
  • Blumen Advanced Hand Sanitizer Lavender, with 70% alcohol
  • Blumen Advanced Hand Sanitizer Aloe, with 70% alcohol
  • Blumen Antibacterial Fresh Citrus Hand Sanitizer
  • Blumen Hand Sanitizer Fresh Citrus
  • KLAR and DANVER Instant Hand Sanitizer
  • Hello Kitty Hand Sanitizer
  • Assured Instant Hand Sanitizer (Vitamin E and Aloe)
  • Assured Instant Hand Sanitizer (Aloe and Moisturizers)
  • Assured Instant Hand Sanitizer Vitamin E and Aloe
  • Assured Instant Hand Sanitizer Aloe and Moisturizers
  • BLUMEN Instant Hand Sanitizer Fragrance Free
  • BLUMEN Instant Hand Sanitizer Aloe Vera
  • Assured Aloe
  • bio aaa Advance Hand Sanitizer 
  • LumiSkin Advance Hand Sanitizer 4 oz
  • LumiSkin Advance Hand Sanitizer 16 oz
  • QualitaMed Hand Sanitizer  
  • NEXT Hand Sanitizer
  • Clear Advanced Hand Sanitizer with 70% Alcohol extra soft with glycerin and aloe
  • NuuxSan Instant Antibacterial Hand Sanitizer
  • NuuxSan Instant Hand Sanitizer
  • Assured Instant Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer with Aloe and Moisturizers
  • Assured Instant Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer with Vitamin E and Aloe
  • Modesa Instant Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer with Moisturizers and Aloe Vera
  • Modesa Instant Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer with Moisturizers and Vitamin E
  • Herbacil Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer 70% Alcohol
  • Herbacil Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer 70% Alcohol
  • Herbacil Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer 70% Alcohol
  • Earths Amenities Instant Unscented Hand Sanitizer with Aloe Vera Advanced
  • Hand Sanitizer Agavespa Skincare
  • Vidanos Easy Cleaning Rentals Hand Sanitizer Agavespa Skincare
  • All-Clean Hand Sanitizer
  • Esk Biochem Hand Sanitizer
  • Lavar 70 Gel Hand Sanitizer
  • The Good Gel Antibacterial Gel Hand Sanitizer
  • CleanCare NoGerm Advanced Hand Sanitizer 80% Alcohol
  • CleanCare NoGerm Advanced Hand Sanitizer 75% Alcohol
  • CleanCare NoGerm Advanced Hand Sanitizer 80% Alcohol
  • Saniderm Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • Hand sanitizer Gel Unscented 70% Alcohol
  • Medicare Alcohol Antiseptic Topical Solution
  • GelBact Hand Sanitizer
  • Hand Sanitizer
  • TriCleanz
  • Sayab Antisepctic Hand Sanitizer 100
  • Jaloma Antiseptic Hand Sanitizer Ethyl Alcohol 62% with Vitamin E
  • Leiper's Fork Distillery Bulk Disinfectant per 5 gallon and Leiper's Fork Distillery 16 oz bottle
  • Andy's Best
  • Andy's
  • NeoNatural
  • Plus Advanced
  • Optimus Instant Hand Sanitizer
  • Optimus Lubricants Instant Hand Sanitizer
  • Optimus Instant Hand Sanitizer
  • Selecto Hand Sanitizer
  • Shine and Clean Hand Sanitizer
  • Hand Sanitizer Disinfectant Gel 70% Ethyl Alcohol
  • Hand Sanitizer Disinfectant Gel 70% Ethyl Alcohol Rinse Free Hand Rub
  • Mystic Shield Protection hand sanitizer
  • Born Basic. Anti-Bac Hand Sanitizer 70% alcohol
  • Born Basic. Anti-Bac Hand Sanitizer 65% Alcohol
  • Scent Theory -- Keep It Clean -- Pure Clean Anti-bacterial Hand Sanitizer
  • Cavalry
  • ENLIVEN Hand Sanitizing Gel
  • Lux Eoi Hand Sanitizing Gel
  • Scent Theory -- Keep It Clean -- Pure Clean Anti-bacterial Hand Sanitizer
  • Bersih Hand Sanitizer Gel Fragrance Free
  • Bersih Antiseptic Alcohol 70% Topical Solution hand sanitizer
  • Purity Advanced Hand Sanitizer
  • Hand Sanitizer Gel Alcohol 70%
  • TriCleanz Tritanium Labs Hand Sanitizer
  • Britz Hand Sanitizer Ethyl Alcohol 70%    
  • Parabola Hand Sanitizer  
  • Urbane Bath and Body Hand Sanitizer    
  • Cleaner Hand Sanitizer Rinse Free 70%    
  • Handzer Hand Sanitizer Rinse Free
  • Kleanz Antibacterial Hand Sanitizer Advanced
  • Be Safe Hand Sanitizer
  • Wave Hand Sanitizer Gel
  • DAESI Hand Sanitizer  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020

Clinical Evaluation of TerraGene MiniBio Sterilization Monitoring System Beginning and Followed Soon by 3M™ Attest™





Dentistry has always had a strong track record when it comes to patient safety... especially in the realm of infection control.  

As part of any good infection control program, one of the key points is to make sure that not only are all the necessary steps being taken, but that those necessary steps are effective.  Autoclaves need to be validated on a regular basis to ensure that they are working properly and that instruments are being effectively sterilized.

This is done by utilizing spore tests.  The majority of offices use some type of a monitoring service where a spore "strip" is used.  The strip is a slip of paper that basically has spores embedded in it.  The strip is run through a sterilization cycle then sent to an outside lab where they attempt to grow the embedded spores.  If no growth occurs, the strip is sterile and the test is considered "pass".  If however growth occurs, than the test is considered "fail" and the office is notified and the autoclave is taken out of service. A second test is run to make sure of the result.  If it fails again, the autoclave is serviced and over-hauled.  If it passes then the original fail is considered an aberration.

The main problem with using an offsite vendor for this service is the time it takes to turnaround the results.  The strip has to reach the lab and the tests have to run.  Wouldn't it be great to be able to bring this all in house?

That is the concept behind a couple of new devices that I'll be testing in the next few weeks.  They are the TerraGene MiniBio and the 3M Attest Mini Auto-Reader.

Both of these devices can provide results of autoclave sterility *in under thirty minutes*.  Plus they keep all of the tasks involved with this in-house giving the office greater control over the entire process.

I'm very excited to begin clinical testing on both devices.  At the time of this post, I have run 2 cycles on the TerraGene System and one on the 3M (due to the TerraGene being in the office first).  Both have been impressive in this limited testing.

As I do with all my product testing, I'll be running both devices through some fairly rigorous protocols and then report back here on the blog when my work is done.

If you have any questions, please leave them in the comments section or feel free to email me directly.

I have quite a few products and devices to test in the next few months, so check back frequently to see what I'm about to attempt to break and then see how successful I was.  Thanks for reading!

Tuesday, August 4, 2020

Healthcare Sector Leads in Costs per Data Breach



Customer Personal Data Exposed in 80% of Breaches Analyzed; AI and Automation Significantly Reduce Costs
Security needs to continue to be a major focus for businesses in general, but especially for healthcare in particular.  As regular readers know, I am constantly preaching about the importance of securing patient data and protecting PHI (Protected Health Information).

The costs of healthcare data breaches continue to climb exponentially.  While these costs are affected by the size of the organization, even small practices need to be vigilant.  Hospitals and insurance companies are obviously much riper targets due to their massive revenues, but criminals also know and understand that small private offices have a much lower budget to implement security measures.  Therefore even with lower overall budgets, private offices still need to remain prepared.

This also falls back onto the privacy laws of HIPAA.  Obviously in addition to the costs of repairing an intrusion there is also the potential for sizable fines from the Department of Health and Human Services if a breach occurs.

Here is the info on breaches, straight from IBM:

IBM Security (NYSE: IBM) announced today the results of a global study examining the financial impact of data breaches, revealing that these incidents cost companies studied $3.86 million per breach on average, and that compromised employee accounts were the most expensive root cause. Based on in-depth analysis of data breaches experienced by over 500 organizations worldwide, 80% of these incidents resulted in the exposure of customers' personally identifiable information (PII). Out of all types of data exposed in these breaches, customer PII was also the costliest to businesses studied.

As companies are increasingly accessing sensitive data via new remote work and cloud-based business operations, the report sheds light on the financial losses that organizations can suffer if this data is compromised. A separate IBM study found that over half of surveyed employees new to working from home due to the pandemic have not been provided with new guidelines on how to handle customer PII, despite the changing risk models associated with this shift.

Sponsored by IBM Security and conducted by the Ponemon Institute, the 2020 Cost of a Data Breach Report is based on in-depth interviews with more than 3,200 security professional in organizations that suffered a data breach over the past year.1 Some of the top findings from this year's report include:

  • Smart Tech Slashes Breach Costs in Half: Companies studied who had fully deployed security automation technologies (which leverage AI, analytics and automated orchestration to identify and respond to security events) experienced less than half the data breach costs compared to those who didn't have these tools deployed – $2.45 million vs. $6.03 million on average.
  • Paying a Premium for Compromised Credentials: In incidents where attackers accessed corporate networks through the use of stolen or compromised credentials, studied businesses saw nearly $1 million higher data breach costs compared to the global average – reaching $4.77 million per data breach. Exploiting third-party vulnerabilities was the second costliest root cause of malicious breaches ($4.5 million) for this group.   
  • Mega Breach2 Costs Soar by the Millions: Breaches wherein over 50 million records were compromised saw costs jump to $392 million from $388 million the previous year. Breaches where 40 to 50 million records were exposed cost studied companies $364 million on average, a cost increase of $19 million compared to the 2019 report.
  • Nation State Attacks – The Most Damaging Breaches: Data breaches believed to originate from nation state attacks were the costliest, compared to other threat actors examined in the report. State-sponsored attacks averaged $4.43 million in data breach costs, surpassing both financially motivated cybercriminals and hacktivists.

"When it comes to businesses' ability to mitigate the impact of a data breach, we're beginning to see a clear advantage held by companies that have invested in automated technologies," said Wendi Whitmore, Vice President, IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence. "At a time when businesses are expanding their digital footprint at an accelerated pace and the security industry's talent shortage persists, teams can be overwhelmed securing more devices, systems and data. Security automation can help resolve this burden, not only supporting a faster breach response but a more cost-efficient one as well."

Employee Credentials and Misconfigured Clouds ­– Attackers' Entry Point of Choice
Stolen or compromised credentials and cloud misconfigurations were the most common causes of a malicious breach for companies in the report, representing nearly 40% of malicious incidents. With over 8.5 billion records exposed in 2019, and attackers using previously exposed emails and passwords in one out of five breaches studied, businesses should rethink their security strategy via the adoption of a zero-trust approach – reexamining how they authenticate users and the extent of access users are granted.

Similarly, companies' struggle with security complexity – a top breach cost factor – is likely contributing to cloud misconfigurations becoming a growing security challenge. The 2020 report revealed that attackers used cloud misconfigurations to breach networks nearly 20% of the time, increasing breach costs by more than half a million dollars to $4.41 million on average – making it the third most expensive initial infection vector examined in the report.

State Sponsored Attacks Strike Heaviest
Despite representing just 13% of malicious breaches studied, state-sponsored threat actors were the most damaging type of adversary according to the 2020 report, suggesting that financially motivated attacks (53%) don't necessarily translate into higher financial losses for businesses. The highly tactical nature, longevity and stealth maneuvers of state-backed attacks, as well as the high value data targeted, often result in a more extensive compromise of victim environments, increasing breach costs to an average of $4.43 million.

In fact, the respondents in the Middle East, a region that historically experiences a higher proportion of state-sponsored attacks compared to other parts of the world3, saw over 9% yearly rise in their average breach cost, incurring the second highest average breach cost ($6.52 million) amongst the 17 regions studied. Similarly, businesses studied in the energy sector, one of the most frequently targeted industries by nation states, experienced a 14% increase in breach costs year over year, averaging $6.39 million.

Advanced Security Technologies Prove Smart for Business
The report highlights the growing divide in breach costs between businesses implementing advanced security technologies and those lagging behind, revealing a cost-saving difference of $3.58 million for studied companies with fully deployed security automation versus those that have yet to deploy this type of technology. The cost gap has grown by $2 million, from a difference of $1.55 million in 2018.

Companies in the study with fully deployed security automation also reported a significantly shorter response time to breaches, another key factor shown to reduce breach costs in the analysis. The report found that AI, machine learning, analytics and other forms of security automation enabled companies to respond to breaches over 27% faster on average, than companies that have yet to deploy security automation – the latter of which require on average 74 additional days to identify and contain a breach.

Incident response (IR) preparedness also continues to heavily influence the financial aftermath of a breach. According to the report, companies with neither an IR team nor testing of IR plans experience $5.29 million in average breach costs, whereas companies that have both an IR team and use tabletop exercises or simulations to test IR plans experience $2 million less in breach costs – reaffirming that preparedness and readiness yield a significant ROI in cybersecurity.

Some additional findings from this year's report include:

  • Remote Work Risk Will Have a Cost: With hybrid work models creating less controlled environments, the report found that 70% of companies studied that adopted telework amid the pandemic expect it will exacerbate data breach costs.
  • CISOs Faulted for Breaches, Despite Limited Decision-Making Power: Forty-six percent of respondents said the CISO/CSO is ultimately held responsible for the breach, despite only 27% stating the CISO/CSO is the security policy and technology decision-maker. The report found that appointing a CISO was associated with $145,000 cost savings versus the average cost of a breach.
  • Majority of Cyber Insured Businesses Use Claims for Third Party Fees: The report found that breaches at studied organizations with cyber insurance cost on average nearly $200,000 less than the global average of $3.86 million. In fact, of these organizations that used their cyber insurance, 51% applied it to cover third-party consulting fees and legal services, while 36% of organizations used it for victim restitution costs. Only 10% used claims to cover the cost of ransomware or extortion.
  • Regional & Industry Insights: While studied companies in the U.S. continued to experience the highest data breach costs in the world, at $8.64 million on average, those studied in Scandinavia experienced the biggest year over year increase in breach costs, observing a nearly 13% rise. Responding healthcare companies continued to incur the highest average breach costs at $7.13 million — an over 10% increase compared to the 2019 study.

About the Study
The annual Cost of a Data Breach Report is based on in-depth analysis of real-world data breaches experienced by over 500 organizations worldwide taking place between August 2019 and April 2020, taking into account hundreds of cost factors including legal, regulatory and technical activities to loss of brand equity, customers, and employee productivity.

To download a copy of the 2020 Cost of a Data Breach Report, please visit: ibm.com/databreach

Sign up for the 2020 Cost of a Data Breach Report webinar on Wednesday, August 12, 2020 at 11:00 a.m. ET here: https://ibm.biz/BdqhMf

About IBM Security
IBM Security offers one of the most advanced and integrated portfolios of enterprise security products and services. The portfolio, supported by world-renowned IBM X-Force® research, enables organizations to effectively manage risk and defend against emerging threats. IBM operates one of the world's broadest security research, development and delivery organizations, monitors 70 billion security events per day in more than 130 countries, and has been granted more than 10,000 security patents worldwide. For more information, please check www.ibm.com/security, follow @IBMSecurity on Twitter or visit the IBM Security Intelligence blog.

1 Report analyzes data breaches occurring between August 2019 and April 2020. Limitations of the report's methodology can be found in the report.
2 The 2020 Cost of a Data Breach Report examines the cost of a mega breach, namely breaches involving the loss or theft of one million records or more, based on a separate analysis of a specific sample.
3 According to the IBM 2020 X-Force Threat Intelligence Index: https://ibm.biz/downloadxforcethreatindex

Monday, August 3, 2020

Philips Announces Vulnerability in DreamMapper CPAP Software


As someone who treats obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) on a regular basis, I thought I should make readers aware of this potential threat.  One of the most popular makes or CPAP machines is Philips.  The electronics giant makes all kinds of devices, and their Dream Station line of CPAP devices is one of the industry's best known.  The device contains a cellular connection that allows it to send a patient's sleep statistics out to a server where the information can be reviewed by both doctors and the patient.  While this is a great way to keep those informed who need to be informed, there is also the potential for others to access this information.  Many of you who read this blog probably either treat OSA patients or may be using a Dream Station yourself.  Read on for the details that Philips has provided about this potential vulnerability...



Publication Date: July 30, 2020

Update Date: July 30, 2020

 

Philips is a committed leader in medical device cybersecurity. As part of our global Product Security Policy, the company conducts extensive, ongoing analysis of our products, often in collaboration with customers and researchers, to identify and address potential vulnerabilities.  

 

In accordance with Philips’ Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Policy for the awareness and remediation of possible security vulnerabilities, the company is proactively issuing an advisory regarding the Philips DreamMapper software.

 

Philips has become aware of a potential medium-severity vulnerability regarding access to log file information associated with the Philips DreamMapper software, affecting only Versions 2.24.x and prior.

 

This potential issue requires a low skill level to exploit. To date, Philips has not received any reports of exploitation of this vulnerability or of incidents from clinical use that we have been able to associate with this issue.

 

Successful exploitation may allow an unauthorized user attacker access to the log file information containing descriptive error messages. This potential vulnerability does not impact patient safety. The Philips DreamMapper software is a personalized therapy adherence tool for sleep apnea patients, and is not a clinical application – it does not directly provide therapy or diagnosis to patients.

 

Philips plans a new release for DreamMapper by June 30, 2021 that remediates the security vulnerability identified. Philips has reported this potential vulnerability and its mitigation to customers and the appropriate government agencies, including CISA, which is issuing an advisory.

 

Users with questions regarding their specific Philips DreamMapper installation should contact their local Philips service support team, or regional service support. Philips contact information is available at the following location:  https://www.usa.philips.com/healthcare/solutions/customer-service-solutions

 

https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ics/advisories/icsma-20-212-01    

Thursday, July 30, 2020

Dentsply Sirona World 2020 Moves to a Localized In-Person and Global Virtual Programs




An interesting addendum to yesterday's post, which was regarding the announcement that Dentsply Sirona has chosen not to be at the IDS meeting in Cologne in March 2021.

Now comes word that their annual U.S. extravaganza Dentsply Sirona World is moving to a virtual platform for 2020.  Here are all the details...


In addition to a robust general session, numerous opportunities for networking and always-expected exceptional entertainment, the new program will feature dynamic industry speakers in real time and on-demand, with a varied range of engaging course topics, making it an expanded individual and personalized training event for all attendees.


Dentsply Sirona, the world's largest manufacturer of professional dental products and technologies, announced today that Dentsply Sirona World 2020 will be reimagined into dynamic localized in-person and globally-available virtual events.  The new formats - certain to delight attendees - will offer expanded opportunities for earning CE credit and feature the best and brightest speakers in dentistry presenting engaging educational sessions across 12 unique tracks.  The in-person program originally scheduled October 1-3, 2020 in Las Vegas, NV will be postponed to a later date.

"The current circumstances prevent an event the size and quality of Dentsply Sirona World to take place in person," said Senior Vice President Eric Bruno.  "Though we are postponing the event in Las Vegas, the localized in-person programs and the new expanded virtual event will be packed with the same great content expected of The Ultimate Dental Meeting presented in a new, innovative forum.  We are taking a stand that dentistry is essential and that digital dentistry is the future, so we are doubling down on our digital efforts for Dentsply Sirona World and complementing those with localized in-person programming in collaboration with our industry partners."

At its core, Dentsply Sirona World is a celebration of dentistry combining incredible professional development courses, ample opportunities to connect and network with thousands of dental professionals and class entertainment in an exciting, inspiring atmosphere.  the online event will feature a full program with a general session and cutting-edge breakouts tailored to individual needs, with introductory to expert-level courses ranging from specialities such as implantology, to laboratory courses, to hygiene topics.

The Dentsply Sirona World 2020 localized in-person programs and virtual event will bring an exceptional experience to attendees, with our continued commitment for delivering health smiles through healthy practices: added Bruno.  "The virtual and local in-person programs will allow attendees to interact with our speaker, products and latest technologies in an entirely new way while continuing to shape the future of dentistry."

The specific dates and more details of the localized in-person programs and the virtual Dentsply Sirona World event will be announced in the coming weeks.

Everyone already registered for Dentsply Sirona World 2020 receives registration for the virtual program; no action is required on registered attendees' part to register for the virtual program.  Current registrations for the in-person Dentsply Sirona World 2020 will automatically transfer to the new in-person 2021 date when it i announced.  Additional details regarding the virtual event will be forthcoming in the next few weeks.

For updates and announcements regarding the virtual Dentsply Sirona World program, visit www.dentsplysironaworld.com often.  

Wednesday, July 29, 2020

Dentsply Sirona will not take part in the International Dental Show (IDS) in March 2021




Taking into account all the different factors for its customers and employees and following intensive discussions, Dentsply Sirona has decided the Company will not attend the International Dental Show (IDS), scheduled to be held from March 9th to 13th, 2021 in Cologne, Germany. This also applies to Dentsply Sirona brands VDW, MIS and Zhermack.

 

Charlotte/Bensheim, July 28th, 2020. Current estimates indicate that the expected restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2021 will almost certainly not allow the proximity and depth of consultation that Dentsply Sirona and its customers know and value.

 

In particular, this environment would mean that customer meetings, interactions and consultations would not have their usual quality. Dentsply Sirona also believes that travel conditions will result in significantly fewer national and, especially, international visitors attending the IDS. The company puts the safety of its customers and employees first when making these types of decisions.

 

Walter Petersohn, Chief Commercial Officer at Dentsply Sirona, says, "It was a difficult decision to make, but much of what makes the IDS and its unique dynamics what they are, will not be possible in March 2021 because of the conditions we expect due to COVID-19. We would not be able to provide our customers and visitors with their usual experience at the show at this time. The same applies to the quality that they expect of Dentsply Sirona. We trust that the situation will change in due course, and we already look forward to taking part in the next IDS."

 


 

 

ABOUT DENTSPLY SIRONA

Dentsply Sirona is the world’s largest manufacturer of professional dental products and technologies, with over a century of innovation and service to the dental industry and patients worldwide. Dentsply Sirona develops, manufactures, and markets a comprehensive solutions offering including dental and oral health products as well as other consumable medical devices under a strong portfolio of world class brands. Dentsply Sirona’s products provide innovative, high-quality and effective solutions to advance patient care and deliver better and safer dental care. Dentsply Sirona’s headquarter is located in Charlotte, North Carolina. The company’s shares are listed in the United States on NASDAQ under the symbol XRAY. Visit www.dentsplysirona.com for more information about Dentsply Sirona and its products.

 

Tuesday, July 28, 2020

Clinical Evaluation of Apex Dental Materials PinkWave Curing Light is Beginning

 

 

 

As regular readers know, I spend a fair amount of my time working with different products that are new to the market.  Sometimes they are prototypes that are in the early design stages, sometimes they are devices that are close to heading to the market, and finally some are boxed up and ready to go.  Doing clinical evaluations is one of the things I love most about my job as “Technology Evangelist”.

 

Recently I received a product to evaluate that is from Apex Dental Materials.  The company has been around since 1998 is heavily involved with the work of Dr. John Kanca.  They manufacture and sell a variety of dental products that fall into the category of “bonded materials.  However, the product I received to evaluate is not a material, it’s a curing light designed to set those bonded materials.  (Disclaimer, I happen to be friends with Dr. Kanca, but I will not let that friendship impact this evaluation).

 

The device is called PinkWave and it comes at the idea of light curing dental materials, from a little bit different angle.

 

For several years, dentistry relied on a photoinitiator called camphorquinone in our composites.  It’s a material that worked so well, that it is still used in almost every light cured material on the market.  When exposed to a certain color (or wavelength) of light, the chemical causes a photo polymerization reaction that causes the composite to harden.  Basically a composite with camphorquinone (abbreviated CPQ in the literature) is set with an LED array that creates light at a wavelength of 450 nanometers.  CPQ reacts at 450 nm +/- 30 nm.  That is why, in the early 2000s, when the blue LED was created, curing lights suddenly went from large devices with expensive and short lifespan halogen bulbs, to compact LED devices.

 

The only drawback with CPQ is that it tends to have a slightly yellowish color which can potentially affect the shade of the restorative material.  Due to that fact, some companies have created proprietary photoinitiators that don’t exhibit this.  These proprietary photoinitiators require a different wavelength of light to set them.  This is why many lights now come with LEDs of varying wavelengths that are referred to as “broadband curing lights”.  

 

Now we are seeing a new development in the realm of curing lights with the PinkWave.  This device not only provides the “broadband curing” aspect but also has TWO other wavelengths as well.  The extra 2 are a red and a near infrared that is invisible to the human eye.

 

I’m excited to see what the PinkWave can do.  I’m going to be performing some bench tests as well as some clinical applications.  I’ll report back on what I discovered when I’m done.