Literature DB >> 23301205

Positioning errors and quality assessment in panoramic radiography.

Manu Dhillon1, Srinivasa M Raju, Sankalp Verma, Divya Tomar, Raviprakash S Mohan, Manisha Lakhanpal, Bhuvana Krishnamoorthy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study was performed to determine the relative frequency of positioning errors, to identify those errors directly responsible for diagnostically inadequate images, and to assess the quality of panoramic radiographs in a sample of records collected from a dental college.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study consisted of 1,782 panoramic radiographs obtained from the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. The positioning errors of the radiographs were assessed and categorized into nine groups: the chin tipped high, chin tipped low, a slumped position, the patient positioned forward, the patient positioned backward, failure to position the tongue against the palate, patient movement during exposure, the head tilted, and the head turned to one side. The quality of the radiographs was further judged as being 'excellent', 'diagnostically acceptable', or 'unacceptable'.
RESULTS: Out of 1,782 radiographs, 196 (11%) were error free and 1,586 (89%) were present with positioning errors. The most common error observed was the failure to position the tongue against the palate (55.7%) and the least commonly experienced error was patient movement during exposure (1.6%). Only 11% of the radiographs were excellent, 64.1% were diagnostically acceptable, and 24.9% were unacceptable.
CONCLUSION: The positioning errors found on panoramic radiographs were relatively common in our study. The quality of panoramic radiographs could be improved by careful attention to patient positioning.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Quality Control; Radiography, Panoramic

Year:  2012        PMID: 23301205      PMCID: PMC3534173          DOI: 10.5624/isd.2012.42.4.207

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent        ISSN: 2233-7822


  17 in total

1.  The quality of panoramic radiographs in a sample of general dental practices.

Authors:  V E Rushton; K Horner; H V Worthington
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  1999-06-26       Impact factor: 1.626

2.  Quality evaluation of young adults' radiographs in Finnish public oral health service.

Authors:  S E Helminen; M Vehkalahti; J Wolf; H Murtomaa
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Common errors on panoramic radiographs taken in a dental school.

Authors:  Zühre Zafersoy Akarslan; Hülya Erten; Kahraman Güngör; Ilkay Celik
Journal:  J Contemp Dent Pract       Date:  2003-05-15

Review 4.  Some of the factors to be considered in the prescription and timing of bitewing radiography in the diagnosis and management of dental caries.

Authors:  N B Pitts; E A Kidd
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  An audit of film reject and repeat rates in a department of dental radiology.

Authors:  P P Nixon; J Thorogood; J Holloway; N J Smith
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Evaluation of panoramic dental radiographs taken in private practice.

Authors:  N A Brezden; S L Brooks
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol       Date:  1987-05

7.  Guidelines on radiology standards for primary dental care: a resumé. Royal College of Radiologists and the National Radiological Protection Board.

Authors:  P N Hirschmann
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  1995-03-11       Impact factor: 1.626

8.  Effective dose and risk assessment from film tomography used for dental implant diagnostics.

Authors:  N L Frederiksen; B W Benson; T W Sokolowski
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 2.419

9.  Real, double, and ghost images in rotational panoramic radiography.

Authors:  W D McDavid; R P Langlais; U Welander; C R Morris
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 2.419

10.  Clinical image quality evaluation for panoramic radiography in Korean dental clinics.

Authors:  Bo-Ram Choi; Da-Hye Choi; Kyung-Hoe Huh; Won-Jin Yi; Min-Suk Heo; Soon-Chul Choi; Kwang-Hak Bae; Sam-Sun Lee
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2012-09-21
View more
  7 in total

1.  A new bite block for panoramic radiographs of anterior edentulous patients: A technical report.

Authors:  Jong-Woong Park; Khanthaly Symkhampha; Kyung-Hoe Huh; Won-Jin Yi; Min-Suk Heo; Sam-Sun Lee; Soon-Chul Choi
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2015-06-19

Review 2.  Common positioning errors in panoramic radiography: A review.

Authors:  Rafael Henrique Nunes Rondon; Yamba Carla Lara Pereira; Glauce Crivelaro do Nascimento
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2014-03-19

3.  Evaluation of Panoramic Radiographs in Relation to the Mandibular Third Molar and to Incidental Findings in an Adult Population.

Authors:  Josefine Cederhag; Nina Lundegren; Per Alstergren; Xie-Qi Shi; Kristina Hellén-Halme
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2020-12-26

4.  Mandibular Canal Enlargement: Clinical and Radiological Characteristics.

Authors:  Chong Jun Ai; Nazimi Abd Jabar; Tan Huann Lan; Roszalina Ramli
Journal:  J Clin Imaging Sci       Date:  2017-07-13

5.  Panoramic radiography and patients with disability: a new simple breathing technique to reduce common airspace error.

Authors:  Antonia M Scott; Warren M Reed
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2022-01-04

6.  Custom Focal Trough in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Reformatted Panoramic Versus Digital Panoramic for Mental Foramen Position to Aid Implant Planning.

Authors:  Khaled Beshtawi; Emad Qirresh; Mohamed Parker; Shoayeb Shaik
Journal:  J Clin Imaging Sci       Date:  2020-06-08

7.  Prediction of maxillary canine impaction based on panoramic radiographs.

Authors:  Raes Margot; Cadenas De Llano-Pérula Maria; Alqerban Ali; Laenen Annouschka; Verdonck Anna; Willems Guy
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2019-09-26
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.