OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of Ektaspeed Plus film (EPF), a charge-coupled device (CCD), and photostimulable phosphor (PSP)-based digital images for detection of simulated periapical lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Lesions were simulated in the periapical areas of 24 human mandibular sections invested in acrylic using burs of sizes #1, 2, 4, and 6 and imaged using EPF, CCD, and PSP sensors. Percent correct response scores, sensitivity, and specificity values were computed for all variables. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and post hoc testing were performed to determine the effects of imaging modality, observer, and lesion sizes with respect to lesion detection. RESULTS: EPF displayed the highest sensitivity and specificity, followed by PSP and CCD images (P <.001). Percent correct score was the highest for 3 of 4 observers when EPF was used. Analysis of variance revealed significance (P <.001) with respect to all variables. Observers with experience in digital image-viewing performed better than those without such experience (P <.001). Intraobserver agreement was fair (kappa = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: EPF outperformed CCD and PSP images when observers could manipulate image characteristics.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of Ektaspeed Plus film (EPF), a charge-coupled device (CCD), and photostimulable phosphor (PSP)-based digital images for detection of simulated periapical lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Lesions were simulated in the periapical areas of 24 human mandibular sections invested in acrylic using burs of sizes #1, 2, 4, and 6 and imaged using EPF, CCD, and PSP sensors. Percent correct response scores, sensitivity, and specificity values were computed for all variables. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and post hoc testing were performed to determine the effects of imaging modality, observer, and lesion sizes with respect to lesion detection. RESULTS: EPF displayed the highest sensitivity and specificity, followed by PSP and CCD images (P <.001). Percent correct score was the highest for 3 of 4 observers when EPF was used. Analysis of variance revealed significance (P <.001) with respect to all variables. Observers with experience in digital image-viewing performed better than those without such experience (P <.001). Intraobserver agreement was fair (kappa = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: EPF outperformed CCD and PSP images when observers could manipulate image characteristics.