Radiation dose-reduction techniques in North American dental schools

被引:35
作者
Geist, JR
Katz, JO
机构
[1] Univ Detroit Mercy, Sch Dent, Dept Diagnost Sci, Detroit, MI 48221 USA
[2] Univ Missouri, Sch Dent, Dept Diagnost Sci, Kansas City, MO USA
来源
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS | 2002年 / 93卷 / 04期
关键词
D O I
10.1067/moe.2002.121387
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective. The purpose of this investigation was to describe the extent to which dental schools use materials, equipment, and quality-assurance protocols that reduce radiation exposure to patients. Study Design. Questionnaires soliciting information regarding intraoral and extraoral radiographic practices and quality-assurance procedures were sent to the directors of oral and maxillofacial radiology (OMR) at the 65 schools of dentistry in the United States and Canada, Results. The response rate was 100%. E-speed film is used at 86% of institutions. Direct digital radiography is used at 58% of institutions for intraoral imaging and 11% for extraoral radiography. Other dose-reducing techniques include long source-film distances (88%), rectangular beam limitation (47%), leaded aprons (95% for extraoral films; 85% with thyroid collars for intraoral films), and rare earth intensifying screens (100%). The most commonly used tube potential is 70 kVp (88%). The director of OMR is solely responsible for radiographic policies at approximately 75% of institutions. Regular tests for film fog, speed, and contrast are done at roughly 75% of schools, while over 90% test darkroom lighting and x-ray equipment. Conclusions. Some dose-reducing strategies are commonly used in dental schools, while others have not gained wide acceptance.
引用
收藏
页码:496 / 505
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]   EFFICACY OF THE FDA SELECTION CRITERIA FOR RADIOGRAPHIC ASSESSMENT OF THE PERIODONTIUM [J].
ATCHISON, KA ;
WHITE, SC ;
FLACK, VF ;
HEWLETT, ER ;
KINDER, SA .
JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1995, 74 (07) :1424-1432
[2]   A SURVEY OF RADIOGRAPHIC TECHNIQUES AND EQUIPMENT USED BY A SAMPLE OF GENERAL DENTAL PRACTITIONERS [J].
BOHAY, RN ;
KOGON, SL ;
STEPHENS, RG .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1994, 78 (06) :806-810
[3]   Effect of the geometry of the intraoral position-indicating device on effective dose [J].
Cederberg, RA ;
Frederiksen, NL ;
Benson, BW ;
Sokolowski, TW .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1997, 84 (01) :101-109
[4]  
Farman A G, 1986, J Dent Educ, V50, P304
[5]  
Farman A G, 1991, Dentomaxillofac Radiol, V20, P152
[6]   RADIATION SAFETY AND PROTECTION IN UNITED-STATES DENTAL HYGIENE PROGRAMS [J].
FARMAN, AG ;
HUNTER, N ;
GRAMMER, S .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1986, 62 (01) :102-106
[7]  
FREDERIKSEN NL, 2000, ORAL RADIOLOGY PRINC, P42
[8]   RADIATION-DOSES OF COMMONLY USED DENTAL RADIOGRAPHIC SURVEYS [J].
FREEMAN, JP ;
BRAND, JW .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1994, 77 (03) :285-289
[9]   Sensitometric comparison of speed group E and F dental radiographic films [J].
Geist, JR ;
Brand, JW .
DENTOMAXILLOFACIAL RADIOLOGY, 2001, 30 (03) :147-152
[10]  
Gibbs S J, 1988, Dentomaxillofac Radiol, V17, P15