OBJECTIVES: To compare image quality of intraoral radiographs made with the Nomad portable X-ray unit (Aribex, Inc.) and with a wall-mounted dental X-ray machine in a clinical setting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twelve patients requiring a full-mouth radiographic series for diagnostic purposes were recruited for the study, in which half of the radiographs (one side selected randomly) were made with the Nomad and half with a wall-mounted dental X-ray machine. Each individual image was evaluated independently by three reviewers for diagnostic utility and quality, using a three-point scale: 2 = perfect radiograph; 1 = acceptable for diagnostic purposes despite a small error; 0 = unacceptable. A total score was derived for each of the 220 images, each of the 12 patients, and the study population as a whole. RESULTS: The combined quality scores of the three reviewers for each set of radiographs ranged from 22-60 for the Nomad and 21-55 for the control units. Median scores were 33 for the Nomad and 33.5 for the control. The maximum possible score was nine films/half mouth x two points for perfect film x three reviewers = 54 (maximum 66 for 11 films). Three of the films, all on the same patient in a wheelchair, showed motion artifact (two with Nomad, one with control). DISCUSSION: Image quality for radiographs taken with the Nomad and a wall-mounted X-ray machine appears to be similar in a variety of clinical situations. Motion artifact is not a significant issue with the Nomad.
OBJECTIVES: To compare image quality of intraoral radiographs made with the Nomad portable X-ray unit (Aribex, Inc.) and with a wall-mounted dental X-ray machine in a clinical setting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twelve patients requiring a full-mouth radiographic series for diagnostic purposes were recruited for the study, in which half of the radiographs (one side selected randomly) were made with the Nomad and half with a wall-mounted dental X-ray machine. Each individual image was evaluated independently by three reviewers for diagnostic utility and quality, using a three-point scale: 2 = perfect radiograph; 1 = acceptable for diagnostic purposes despite a small error; 0 = unacceptable. A total score was derived for each of the 220 images, each of the 12 patients, and the study population as a whole. RESULTS: The combined quality scores of the three reviewers for each set of radiographs ranged from 22-60 for the Nomad and 21-55 for the control units. Median scores were 33 for the Nomad and 33.5 for the control. The maximum possible score was nine films/half mouth x two points for perfect film x three reviewers = 54 (maximum 66 for 11 films). Three of the films, all on the same patient in a wheelchair, showed motion artifact (two with Nomad, one with control). DISCUSSION: Image quality for radiographs taken with the Nomad and a wall-mounted X-ray machine appears to be similar in a variety of clinical situations. Motion artifact is not a significant issue with the Nomad.