Objectives The aim of this study was to determine whether a handheld (HH) X-ray device (Nomad Pro 2) is capable of producing equivalent or even superior X-ray image quality in comparison to a wall-mounted (WM) dental X-ray unit (Heliodent Plus) on the basis of objectifiable image quality parameters. Methods Anatomical, radiological and biological dental X-ray image quality parameters of a handheld dental X-ray device (Nomad Pro 2, Kavo Kerr, Biberach, Germany) were compared to a standard wall-mounted dental X-ray unit (Heliodent Plus, Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim, Germany) using a maxillofacial phantom. In addition, the effect of different operators (dentists, dental students, dental assistants) on the dental X-ray image quality was measured. Results HH and WM devices showed comparable image quality for anterior teeth, premolars, molars and bitewing images. During the two-month investigational period, the radiation exposure level for the operator of the Nomad Pro 2 was 0.1 mSv for 203 images. Dentists as the highest trained personnel enrolled in the study achieved better image quality with the Nomad Pro 2 as compared to dental students and dental assistants, especially in the molar region. Conclusions A HH device delivers a comparable image quality to a WM device. In addition, there seem to be short learning curves with regard to image acquisition when using a handheld device, which is further minimised by the previous training of the operating personnel. HH dental X-ray devices, such as the Nomad Pro 2 are a promising adjunct for dental radiology in cases where WM units are of limited practicability.

No abstract

Introduction The benefits of portable dental X-ray devices remain controversially debated. This study aimed to compare the accuracy in positioning dental X-ray images using handheld (Nomad Pro 2) and wall-mounted (Heliodent Plus) X-ray devices. Materials and methods Radiographical imaging was exercised on a maxillofacial phantom using the handheld dental X-ray device Nomad Pro 2 (Kavo Kerr, Biberach, Germany) and the wall-mounted dental X-ray device Heliodent Plus (Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim, Germany). Accuracy of device positioning (i.e., centeredness and perpendicularity) was measured as horizontal and vertical deviation (pixels and millimeters) from a centrally positioned crosshair. The reproducibility of the results was tested for 80 images per device and operator. IBM SPSS (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analyses. Results Centeredness of produced dental X-rays was significantly better for the wall-mounted device than for the handheld device in both deviation from the x-axis (p = 0.042) and y-axis (p = 0.020). The perpendicularity of the produced dental X-rays was significantly better for the handheld device than for the wall-mounted device for both horizontal (p < 0.001) and vertical (p < 0.001) plains. Conclusions Handheld dental X-ray devices appear to provide a high degree of accuracy in image positioning, especially in regard to proper perpendicular image angulation.