PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1983

Recommendations for quality assurance in dental radiography.

Dental practitioners in the United States are exposing more than 400 million dental radiographs per year. Major national studies have indicated that improvements in radiographic quality is needed. Quality assurance (QA) programs used in medical radiology are designed to produce radiographs that are of high quality, use the least amount of radiation, and are produced at minimum cost. Preliminary recommendations are presented from the Quality Assurance Committee of the American Academy of Dental Radiology as an outline for establishing preventive maintenance of x-ray systems and a preliminary method for determining appropriate QA monitoring levels for dentistry. Included are recommendations for three stages of dental radiology QA. These are preliminary ratings and are expected to change as more dental QA information becomes available.

Humans↗
PubMed1993

Organ absorbed doses in intraoral dental radiography.

A dental radiography unit operating at 70 kV (nominal) and 20 cm focus-skin distance was used to irradiate an anthropomorphic phantom loaded with lithium fluoride thermoluminescent dosemeters, in order to assess the variation in organ absorbed dose with intraoral periapical radiographic view. 14 views using the bisecting-angle technique and four views using the paralleling technique were studied. The results are presented and the doses and dose distributions examined. Doses for the paralleling and bisecting-angle techniques are compared, and the effects of focus-skin distance and beam collimation upon patient dosimetry discussed. Sources of uncertainty in dental dosimetry studies using phantoms are also considered.

Bicuspid↗
PubMed1982

Biological effects of radiation from dental radiography. Council on Dental Materials, Instruments, and Equipment.

Clearly, there is ample evidence of adverse effects of radiation in sufficient doses. There is at present no proof of such effects from doses commonly employed in dental practice; however, it has not been possible to prove the absence of such effects. Most experts now agree that there may be a small, difficult to quantify risk of cancer or genetic mutation from diagnostic exposure in patients and in personnel exposed during work. Prudence dictates acceptance of this position until proof to the contrary is available. This report has presented recent attempts to quantify the risk to patients based on speculative calculations and extrapolations. Indices of population risks indicate that medical radiology is the largest source of human-made genetic and leukemogenic radiation burden to the American public. Dental radiology contributes a small-but not necessarily insignificant-portion. Of major concern is the increasing use of radiation for diagnostic purposes in both medicine and dentistry. Technological advances have reduced exposure per examination; presumably this trend will continue so that total exposure of populations to radiation in the healing arts will not increase. Recent analyses suggest that the cancer risk to a patient from a dental radiographic examination is of the order of one in a million; the genetic risk is substantially less, about one in a billion. The risks appear to be essentially equal for full-mouth intraoral and for panoramic examinations. These estimates are numerically quite small, but the effects are severe. Thus, these risks cannot be ignored. However, we currently accept risks of similar magnitude in our daily lives [Table 9]50,51 In addition, the risk of failure to make an accurate diagnosis may be greater than the risk from exposure to the radiation from a justified and properly conducted radiographic examination. It therefore appears reasonable that the information gained from a justified and properly conducted radiographic examination outweighs the risk.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Optimum exposure ranges for computed dental radiography.

OBJECTIVE: Computed dental radiography (CDR; Schick Technologies Inc, Lond Island City, NY, USA) can be used with any dental X-ray generator. The optimum exposure at various tube voltage settings was studied. METHODS: Images were made of a dental QA jaw phantom and a standard aluminium stepwedge. Exposures were made between 50 and 90 kVp at 10 kVp intervals. Two contrast indices were calculated from the bone stepwedge pixel values: CI(1), the ratio between the highest and lowest pixel values, and CI(2), the difference between them. RESULTS: Contrast indices were greatest at low kVp. The gradual decrease in CI(1) with increased exposure demonstrated that the optimum exposure range was always relatively wide. Maximum CI(2) values were found at exposures of 27, 17, 15, 11 and 9microC kg-1 at 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 kVp, respectively, at the centre of the optimum exposure range. Pixel values for each aluminium step increased both with increased exposure and with increased kVp. The longest contrast scale was obtained at 11.0, 9.6, 8.7, 7.2 and 7.0 microC kg-1 at 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 kVp. The steepest slopes were obtained either with thin aluminium steps or at low kVp. CONCLUSIONS: CDR is a fast CCD-based system and is capable of operating at a wide range of kVp settings.

Aluminum↗
PubMed1996

Diagnostic accuracy of direct digital dental radiography for the detection of periapical bone lesions. II. Effects on diagnostic accuracy after application of image processing.

OBJECTIVES: The diagnostic accuracy of direct digital radiography for the detection of small experimentally made periapical lesions was evaluated. A comparison was made between original digital images and images processed with different enhancement facilities of the digital system. STUDY DESIGN: Seven observers assessed the digital images in original mode and after individual image treatment. The diagnostic accuracy was calculated. The processing functions used by the observers were recorded, and the effect of processing was evaluated. RESULTS: The overall diagnostic accuracy was not different for the two image modes. Neither were the individual results of the observers different. The image processing was most effective when alterings of contrast and brightness were used. More complicated processing procedures had less effect on the diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Image processing of direct digital images of high quality has a limited effect on the diagnostic accuracy. Basic processing functions, that is, alterings of contrast and brightness, were preferred for the detection of periapical lesions.

Alveolar Bone Loss↗
PubMed1996

Diagnostic accuracy of direct digital dental radiography for the detection of periapical bone lesions: overall comparison between conventional and direct digital radiography.

OBJECTIVES: The diagnostic accuracy of direct digital radiography for the detection of small, experimentally made, periapical lesions was compared with that of E speed film. The high- and low-contrast resolutions of the imaging systems were also compared. STUDY DESIGN: The high-contrast resolution was evaluated with a line pair plate. The low-contrast resolution was determined with a contrast-detail plexiglass phantom. To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, the periapical region of dry human mandibles was examined. Receiver operating characteristic based on the readings of seven observers were generated. RESULTS: The high-contrast resolution of the digital system was inferior, but the low-contrast resolution was comparable to that of E-speed film. For diagnostic accuracy no significant difference was seen between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the direct digital images is comparable to that of E-speed film for the detection of periapical bone lesions.

Alveolar Bone Loss↗