Sudhakar S1, Ramaswamy P2, Smitha B3, Uday G4. 1. Reader, Department of Oral Medicine & Radiology, St.Joseph Dental College & Hospital , Eluru, Andhrapradesh, India . 2. Professor & HOD, Department of Oral Medicine & Radiology, St.Joseph Dental College & Hospital , Eluru, Andhrapradesh, India . 3. Reader, Department of Oral medicine & Radiology, St. Joseph Dental College & Hospital , Eluru, Andhrapradesh, India . 4. Post Graduate Student, Department of Oral Medicine & Radiology, St. Joseph Dental College & Hospital , Eluru, Andhrapradesh, India .
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intraoral film placement and the film holding equipments are not acceptable by many due to varied reasons. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of extra-oral aiming device developed by Chia-hui chen for imaging the periapical regions of posterior teeth employing the technique suggested by saberi et al. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study subjects included 20 patients in the age group of 10-35 y. The subjects were further subdivided according to the area to be imaged into four groups, with 5 in each. Imaging was done using the device developed by chia-hui chen, with the method employed by newmann and saberi et al., The radiographs were then interpreted for complete coverage of the anatomical structure. The findings were recorded and subjected to Analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistical analysis. RESULTS: The visibility of imaging area was more in mandible (95%) than maxilla (86.5%). The overall accuracy was 90.75%. These findings were statistically non-significant (F- 2.152 & P-0.134). Among the reason for reduced accuracy, overlapping of the opposite arch (4%) was more common and the horizontal overlapping (0.5%) was least common. CONCLUSION: This technique is not meant to replace conventional intraoral radiography. It is a useful supplementary aid to our clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Intraoral film placement and the film holding equipments are not acceptable by many due to varied reasons. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of extra-oral aiming device developed by Chia-hui chen for imaging the periapical regions of posterior teeth employing the technique suggested by saberi et al. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study subjects included 20 patients in the age group of 10-35 y. The subjects were further subdivided according to the area to be imaged into four groups, with 5 in each. Imaging was done using the device developed by chia-hui chen, with the method employed by newmann and saberi et al., The radiographs were then interpreted for complete coverage of the anatomical structure. The findings were recorded and subjected to Analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistical analysis. RESULTS: The visibility of imaging area was more in mandible (95%) than maxilla (86.5%). The overall accuracy was 90.75%. These findings were statistically non-significant (F- 2.152 & P-0.134). Among the reason for reduced accuracy, overlapping of the opposite arch (4%) was more common and the horizontal overlapping (0.5%) was least common. CONCLUSION: This technique is not meant to replace conventional intraoral radiography. It is a useful supplementary aid to our clinical practice.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bisecting angle; Dental radiology; Film holder; Intra-oral; Radiation