Yaser Safi1, Mohammad Esmaeelinejad2, Zahra Vasegh1, Solmaz Valizadeh1, Mohammad Mehdi Aghdasi3, Omid Sarani4, Mahmoud Afsahi5. 1. Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences , Tehran, Iran . 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental School, Shahidbeheshti University of Medical Sciences , Tehran, Iran . 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences , Tehran, Iran . 4. Dentist, Private Practice, Iran . 5. Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dental School, Kerman University of Medical Sciences , Kerman, Iran .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bitewing radiography is a valuable technique for assessment of proximal caries, alveolar crest and periodontal status. Technical errors during radiography result in erroneous radiographic interpretation, misdiagnosis, possible mistreatment or unnecessary exposure of patient for taking a repeat radiograph. AIM: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a film holder modified from the conventional one and compared it with that of conventional film holder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study population comprised of 70 patients who were referred to the Radiology Department for bilateral premolar bitewing radiographs as requested by their attending clinician. Bitewing radiographs in each patient were taken using the newly designed holder in one side and the conventional holder in the other side. The acceptability of the two holders from the perspectives of the technician and patients was determined using a 0-20 point scale. The frequency of overlap and film positioning errors was calculated for each method. RESULTS: The conventional holder had greater acceptability among patients compared to the newly designed holder (mean score of 16.59 versus 13.37). From the technicians' point of view, the newly designed holder was superior to the conventional holder (mean score of 17.33 versus 16.44). The frequency of overlap was lower using the newly designed holder (p<0.001) and it allowed more accurate film positioning (p=0.005). CONCLUSION: The newly designed holder may facilitate the process of radiography for technicians and may be associated with less frequency of radiographic errors compared to the conventional holder.
INTRODUCTION: Bitewing radiography is a valuable technique for assessment of proximal caries, alveolar crest and periodontal status. Technical errors during radiography result in erroneous radiographic interpretation, misdiagnosis, possible mistreatment or unnecessary exposure of patient for taking a repeat radiograph. AIM: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a film holder modified from the conventional one and compared it with that of conventional film holder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study population comprised of 70 patients who were referred to the Radiology Department for bilateral premolar bitewing radiographs as requested by their attending clinician. Bitewing radiographs in each patient were taken using the newly designed holder in one side and the conventional holder in the other side. The acceptability of the two holders from the perspectives of the technician and patients was determined using a 0-20 point scale. The frequency of overlap and film positioning errors was calculated for each method. RESULTS: The conventional holder had greater acceptability among patients compared to the newly designed holder (mean score of 16.59 versus 13.37). From the technicians' point of view, the newly designed holder was superior to the conventional holder (mean score of 17.33 versus 16.44). The frequency of overlap was lower using the newly designed holder (p<0.001) and it allowed more accurate film positioning (p=0.005). CONCLUSION: The newly designed holder may facilitate the process of radiography for technicians and may be associated with less frequency of radiographic errors compared to the conventional holder.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cheek; Digital radiography; Inter-proximal radiographs
Authors: Jacob Horwitz; Eli E Machtei; Peter Reitmeir; Rolf Holle; Ti-Sun Kim; Peter Eickholz Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 8.728