Radiation dose-reduction techniques in North American dental schools

Geist, James R.; Katz, Jerald O.

doi:10.1067/moe.2002.121387

Cited by 42 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 59 publications

(125 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar preferences have been seen in this study and also the ones conducted by Mutyabule [10][11][12][14][15][16][17]. It has been shown that using of rectangular open ended PID (3.5x4.4cm) reduces the skin exposure by 60% than that of round [9].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Oral Radiology Safety Standards Adopted by the General Dentists Practicing in National Capital Region (NCR)

Chaudhry¹,

Jayaprakash²,

Shivalingesh³

et al. 2016

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: With advancement in diagnostic techniques, the utilization of radiologic examination has risen to many folds in the last two decades. Ionizing radiations from the radiographic examination carry the potential for harm by inducing carcinogenesis in addition to the diagnostic information extracted. Radiation doses utilized in the course of dental treatment might be low for individual examinations but patients are exposed to repeated examinations very often and many people are exposed during the course of dental care. Therefore, principles of radiation protection and safety are necessary for the dentists to follow to ensure minimum and inevitable exposure. Aim:The aim of this study was to investigate the knowledge and behaviour of general dentists practicing in the National Capital Region (NCR) regarding radiation safety during oral radiographic procedures. Materials and Methods:The study was a questionnaire based cross-sectional study. A total of 500 general dentists were contacted to participate in the study. The target population entailed of general dentists practicing in the National Capital Region. Data was computed and tabulated in Microsoft excel sheet and statistical analysis was performed with the help of SPSS version 21.0. Results:The total response rate recovered was 70.6% and the respondents comprised of 59% and 41% males & females respectively. Only 64.8% of the general dentists contemplated thyroid to be the most important organ for radiation protection. Only 28.8% of the general dentists followed the position & distance rule appropriately. Conclusion:The results showed that the knowledge and behaviour of the general dentists and the practices adopted by them regarding radiation safety is not satisfactory. To ensure the following of basic and necessary guidelines for radiation safety and protection, strict rules with penalties should be implemented by the state councils and new and interesting methods of education for this spectrum of the field should be introduced.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Oral Radiology Safety Standards Adopted by the General Dentists Practicing in National Capital Region (NCR)

Chaudhry¹,

Jayaprakash²,

Shivalingesh³

et al. 2016

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, at present, every university has its own curriculum and, as known from other studies, it is not always easy to change curricula and convince faculty staff colleagues of this issue. 12 Regarding the knowledge of Flemish GDPs, there are various reasons for the results of this questionnaire being so poor. Perhaps the quality and quantity of the undergraduate education is insufficient, perhaps the quantity of postgraduate education is insufficient or perhaps the quality of the available postgraduate education is insufficient.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Age was not considered an important question in this study, as the age of a dentist does not always reflect that person's knowledge of dental radiology. [10][11][12][13] Furthermore, it is known that not every young dentist starts with new equipment and, vice versa, that not every ''older'' dentist is working with old equipment. Therefore, the age of the intraoral radiographic equipment was considered more important and more relevant as a question.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flemish general dental practitioners' knowledge of dental radiology

Aps¹

2010

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to assess general dental practitioners' knowledge of dental radiography and radiation protection in order to alert the Belgian authorities and dental professional societies. Prior to attending a postgraduate course on intraoral radiology, general dental practitioners in Flanders, Belgium, were asked to fill in a questionnaire regarding the radiological equipment and the techniques they used for intraoral radiography. The availability and type of dental panoramic equipment were also assessed. A total of 374 questionnaires were available for this study. 15% of the attendants used radiographic equipment that was more than 27 years old and 43% reported equipment that operated with a clockwork timer. 32% and 75% respectively had no idea what the kV or mA settings were on their intraoral equipment. 5% were unaware which cone geometry or geometric technique (paralleling or bisecting angle technique) they were using. 81% claimed to be using a short cone technique. 47% did not know what collimation meant, whereas 40% stated that they were using circular collimation. 38% used digital intraoral image detectors (63% were photostimulable storage phosphorplate (PSPP)), but 16% were not sure about the type of sensor they were using (PSPP or solid-state sensors). 61% also had dental panoramic equipment available, 25% of which was digital (10% charge coupled device (CCD) and 15% PSPP). These results clearly indicate the need for continued education on this subject. The latter is an important signal to Belgian authorities and dental professional societies.

show abstract

“…Esta situación dista mucho de la descrita en Estados Unidos, donde prácticamente el 88 % de los aparatos dentales funcionan a 70 kVp (19).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Esta situación es radicalmente diferente a lo descrito en Estados Unidos y Canadá en donde el 85 % de las instalaciones lo utilizan habitualmente (19), aún a costa de eliminar los delantales de protección personal. En ninguno de los estudios revisados en la bibliografía se ha descrito la utilización del escudo submandibular.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Manejo de las radiaciones ionizantes en instalaciones dentales españolas: intraorales y panorámicos

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMENEl objetivo de este estudio fue determinar las características de la radiología dental en la Comunidad Autónoma de Murcia, con el propósito de poder evaluar el grado de cumplimiento de las recomendaciones Oficiales de la Unión Europea. Para ello se estudian 1822 informes oficiales de control de calidad en radiodiagnóstico dental intraoral y 157 pertenecientes a exámenes panorámicos durante cinco años consecutivos. Los resultados obtenidos ponen de manifiesto que un tercio de los equipos dentales intraorales revisados presentan averías en su funcionamiento y un 6´24% en el caso de los panorámicos. Solamente un 63.54% de las instalaciones intraorales cumplirían con las recomendaciones oficiales al emplear equipos modernos que funcionan a 70 kVp, 8 mA, 20 cm. de distancia foco piel y 1.5 mm de Al. Se ha producido un descenso del 11.53% en las dosis medias administradas a lo largo del estudio, aumentando la empleada con aparatos panorámicos. La entrada en vigor de esta nueva legislación ha supuesto un descenso en las dosis medias de radiación administradas a los pacientes tras los cinco años de evolución analizados aunque se sigue incumpliendo las recomendaciones oficiales europeas sobre Protección Radiológica.Palabras clave: Radiodiagnóstico, radiografía dental, dosis medias de radiación, control de calidad. ABSTRACTThe aim of the study was to determinate Dental Radiology behaviour in Murcia Community to control the European Union Recommendations. 1822 official reports on quality assurance in intraoral radiology and 155 official reports on panoramic radiology have been studied. The results indicate that one and a half of intraoral radiographic equipments studied and 6´24% in panoramic had alterations. Only the 63´54% of the surgeries achived the European Community Recommendations of intraoral radiology working to 70 kVp, 8 mA and 1.5 mm of Al. There have been a decrease of the intraoral radiation dose exposured. The recent legislation have meant a decrease in the intraoral radiation dose administrated despite of the unachivement of European Community Recommendations.Key words: Radiodiagnosis, dental radiography, mean doses, assurance quality.

show abstract

Radiation dose-reduction techniques in North American dental schools

Cited by 42 publications

References 59 publications

Oral Radiology Safety Standards Adopted by the General Dentists Practicing in National Capital Region (NCR)

Oral Radiology Safety Standards Adopted by the General Dentists Practicing in National Capital Region (NCR)

Flemish general dental practitioners' knowledge of dental radiology

Manejo de las radiaciones ionizantes en instalaciones dentales españolas: intraorales y panorámicos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About