OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the effects of direct exposure x-ray film speed and background density on observer assessment of endodontic working lengths and on perceived radiographic image quality. STUDY DESIGN: A human cadaver maxilla section with surrounding soft tissues was used for the study. The canal length to the radiographic apex was determined on 4 canals in maxillary posterior teeth by using Trophy RVG images and adjusting the position of a No. 15 file in each canal until the file tip coincided with the radiographic apex in images made at 3 different vertical angulations. The files were measured with a micrometer from the file stop to the file tip to obtain the length to the radiographic apex. Then No. 10 files were placed in the 4 canals at varying lengths short of this previously determined length, and 5 observers assessed the distance from the file tip to the radiographic apex on radiographs made with Kodak D-, E-, and F-speed and Flow D- and E-speed direct exposure x-ray films that were exposed to produce background densities of 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0. Subjective appraisal of radiographic quality was also assessed. RESULTS: Analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significantly different post-hoc analysis results concerning measurement errors made with each film type revealed significantly less error for Kodak Ektaspeed Plus (E-speed) intraoral x-ray film than for Kodak InSight (F-speed) and Flow E; however, no difference was detected among Kodak Ektaspeed Plus (E-speed), Kodak Ultra-Speed (D-speed), and Flow D. Films with a background optical density of 3.0 received 98% favorable ratings; radiographs with a background optical density of 2.0 received 77% favorable ratings; and those with background optical density of 1.5 received only 18% favorable ratings at the 95% confidence level. Flow D film received the most favorable ratings, but there was no statistically significant difference among other film types at the 95% confidence level. CONCLUSIONS: Underexposed radiographs are perceived as inferior to slightly overexposed radiographs for endodontic file length assessment regardless of the film speed used. Current Flow and Kodak E-speed and F-speed radiographs appear to be as accurate as other accepted radiographs used in determining endodontic working lengths. Image background density should be kept constant when making comparisons among x-ray films.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the effects of direct exposure x-ray film speed and background density on observer assessment of endodontic working lengths and on perceived radiographic image quality. STUDY DESIGN: A human cadaver maxilla section with surrounding soft tissues was used for the study. The canal length to the radiographic apex was determined on 4 canals in maxillary posterior teeth by using Trophy RVG images and adjusting the position of a No. 15 file in each canal until the file tip coincided with the radiographic apex in images made at 3 different vertical angulations. The files were measured with a micrometer from the file stop to the file tip to obtain the length to the radiographic apex. Then No. 10 files were placed in the 4 canals at varying lengths short of this previously determined length, and 5 observers assessed the distance from the file tip to the radiographic apex on radiographs made with Kodak D-, E-, and F-speed and Flow D- and E-speed direct exposure x-ray films that were exposed to produce background densities of 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0. Subjective appraisal of radiographic quality was also assessed. RESULTS: Analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significantly different post-hoc analysis results concerning measurement errors made with each film type revealed significantly less error for Kodak Ektaspeed Plus (E-speed) intraoral x-ray film than for Kodak InSight (F-speed) and Flow E; however, no difference was detected among Kodak Ektaspeed Plus (E-speed), Kodak Ultra-Speed (D-speed), and Flow D. Films with a background optical density of 3.0 received 98% favorable ratings; radiographs with a background optical density of 2.0 received 77% favorable ratings; and those with background optical density of 1.5 received only 18% favorable ratings at the 95% confidence level. Flow D film received the most favorable ratings, but there was no statistically significant difference among other film types at the 95% confidence level. CONCLUSIONS: Underexposed radiographs are perceived as inferior to slightly overexposed radiographs for endodontic file length assessment regardless of the film speed used. Current Flow and Kodak E-speed and F-speed radiographs appear to be as accurate as other accepted radiographs used in determining endodontic working lengths. Image background density should be kept constant when making comparisons among x-ray films.