• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.50 no.3
• /
• pp.184-190
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to measure the absorbed dose and to calculate the effective dose for one periapical radiography using the portable and wall type dental X-ray machines. Materials and methods: Thermoluminescent chips were placed at 25 sites throughout the layers of the head and neck of a tissue-equivalent human skull phantom. The man phantom was exposed with the portable and wall type dental X-ray machines. For one periapical radiography taken by portable dental X-ray machine, the exposure setting was 60 kVp, 2 mA and 0.2 seconds, while for one periapical radiography taken by wall type dental X-ray machine, exposure setting was 70 kVp, 8 mA and 0.074 seconds. Absorbed dose measurements were performed and equivalent doses to individual organs were summed using ICRP 103 to calculate effective dose. Results: In the upper anterior periapical radiography using portable dental X-ray machine and in the lower posterior periapical radiography using both machines, the highest absorbed dose was recorded at the mandible body. The effective dose in upper anterior periapical radiography using portable and wall type dental X-ray machines was $4{\mu}Sv$, $2{\mu}Sv$, respectively. In the lower posterior periapical radiography, the effective dose for each portable and wall type dental X-ray machines was $6{\mu}Sv$, $2{\mu}Sv$. Conclusion: It was recommended that the operator use prudently potable dental X-ray machine because that the effective dose in the periapical radiography using wall type dental X-ray machine was lower than that in the periapical radiography using portable dental X-ray machine.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.160-164
• /
• 2012

Objectives: This study was aimed to investigate the methods to reduce operator's radiation dose when taking intraoral radiographs with portable dental X-ray machines. Materials and Methods: Two kinds of portable dental X-ray machines (DX3000, Dexcowin and Rextar, Posdion) were used. Operator's radiation dose was measured with an 1,800 cc ionization chamber (RadCal Corp.) at the hand level of X-ray tubehead and at the operator's chest and waist levels with and without the backscatter shield. The operator's radiation dose at the hand level was measured with and without lead gloves and with long and short cones. Results: The backscatter shield reduced operator's radiation dose at the hand level of X-ray tubehead to 23 - 32%, the lead gloves to 26 - 31%, and long cone to 48 - 52%. And the backscatter shield reduced operator's radiation dose at the operator's chest and waist levels to 0.1 - 37%. Conclusions: When portable dental X-ray systems are used, it is recommended to select X-ray machine attached with a backscatter shield and a long cone and to wear the lead gloves.

• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.254-258
• /
• 2015

To compare the stationary dental X-ray generator and the portable dental X-ray generator and to understand spatial radiation dose depended on locations by measuring spatial radiation dose of the portable dental X-ray generator. The researchers used an Ionization chamber to measure spatial radiation dose which was generated while applying X-ray radiation to real bone skull phantom with both portable and stationary dental X-ray generator. There were 4 measurement locations which were immediate anterior, right, left and posterior. Distance of measurement was 50 cm in every location and the recorded result is an average of two applications of X-ray radiation to the maxillary molar area under the condition of 70 kVp, 3 mA, 0.1 sec. Average spatial radiation dose of portable X-ray generator was $37.51{\mu}Sv$, much higher than that of stationary X-ray generator which was $10.77{\mu}Sv$ (p<0.001). The result of the spatial radiation dose of the portable X-ray generator showed a huge difference depending on types of units which varied from $17.77{\mu}Sv$ to $68.90{\mu}Sv$ (p<0.05), also depending on the measurement location, immediate anterior resulted in the highest radiation dose of $54.14{\mu}Sv$ and immediate right was the lowest of $13.60{\mu}Sv$. Immediate left and posterior, however, resulted in similar radiation dose which were $42.12{\mu}Sv$, $40.18{\mu}Sv$ (p<0.01). With this result, we claim that usage of portable dental X-ray generator should be restricted to patients who can't move and exposure to radiation should be minimized by wearing lead-apron.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.37 no.2
• /
• pp.65-68
• /
• 2007

Purpose: To compare the leakage and scattered radiation from hand-held dental X-ray unit with radiation from fixed dental X-ray unit. Materials and Methods: For evaluation we used one hand-held dental X-ray unit and Oramatic 558 (Trophy Radiologie, France), a fixed dental X-ray unit. Doses were measured with Unfors Multi-O-Meter 512L at the right and left hand levels of X-ray tube head part for the scattered and leakage radiation when human skull DXTTR III was exposed to both dental X-ray units. And for the leakage radiation only, doses were measured at the immediately right, left, superior and posterior side of the tube head part when air was exposed. Exposure parameters of handheld dental X-ray unit were 70 kVp, 3 mA, 0.1 second, and of fixed X-ray unit 70 kVp, 8 mA, 0.45 second. Results: The mean dose at the hand level when human skull DXTTR III was exposed with portable X-ray unit $6.39{\mu}Gy$, and the mean dose with fixed X-ray unit $3.03{\mu}Gy$ (p<0.001). The mean dose at the immediate side of the tube head part when air was exposed with portable X-ray unit was $2.97{\mu}Gy$ and with fixed X-ray unit the mean dose was $0.68{\mu}Gy$ (p<0.01). Conclusions: The leakage and scattered radiation from hand-held dental radiography was greater than from fixed dental radiography.

• Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene
• /
• v.17 no.6
• /
• pp.1053-1065
• /
• 2017

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to evaluate radiation safety education, knowledge and practice of dental hygienists in using handheld portable intraoral X-ray equipment and to suggest the need for radiation safety education in using handheld portable intraoral X-ray equipment. Methods: We surveyed 223 dental hygienists from July, 2017 to August in the dental clinics of Daejeon, Seoul and Gyeonggi area. Results: Radiation safety educational experience was higher in a year's career (72.9%), than 3 years experience (32.5%) (p<0.05). 82.7% of dental clinic workers took university education for radiation safety education while 55.6% of dental hospital workers took company training (p<0.05). More than 70% of the subjects did not have experience of radiation safety education about using portable intraoral X-ray. Radiation safety knowledge was highest in a year's career (p<0.05). The cumulative dose, radiation sensitivity, and lead defense knowledge were high in all subjects, but knowledge related to scattering radiation and scattering radiation sources was low. Practice of portable intraoral X-ray safety was significantly lower than knowledge. Conclusions: Knowledge of portable intraoral radiography safety is available, but performance is poor. Even with the small amount of radiation exposure, the risk is perceivable. There is a need to actively utilize the provided radiation protection products. In order to do this, efforts should be made to improve knowledge and performance of radiation safety through not only college education but also postemployment training.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.50 no.7
• /
• pp.420-430
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to measure the absorbed dose and to calculate the effective dose for full-mouth periapical radiography using the portable dental x-ray machine and panoramic radiography Material and Method: Thermoluminescent chips were placed at 25sites throughout the layers of the head and neck of a tissue-equivalent human skull phantom. The man phantom was exposed with the portable dental x-ray machine and panoramic unit. During full-mouth periapical radiography the exposure setting was 60 kVp, 2 mA and 0.15 ~ 0.25 seconds, while during panoramic radiography the selected exposure setting was 72 kVp, 8 mA and 18 seconds. Absorbed dose measurements were obtained and equivalent doses to individual organs were summed using ICRP 103 to calculate of effective dose. Result: In the full-mouth periapical radiography, the highest absorbed dose was recorded at the mandible body follow with submandibular glands and cheek. Using panoramic unit, the highest absorbed dose was parotid glands and the following was back of neck and submandibular glands. The effective dose in full-mouth periapical radiography using portable dental x-ray machine was 46 ${\mu}Sv$. In panoramic radiography, the effective dose was 38 ${\mu}pSv$. Conclusion: It was recommended to panoramic radiography for general check in the head and neck area because that the effect dose in the panoramic radiography was lower than the dose in the full-mouth periapical radiography using portable dental x-ray machine.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.149-156
• /
• 2007

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to measure the absorbed dose and to calculate the effective dose for periapical radiography done by portable intraoral x-ray machines. Materials and Methods: 14 full mouth, upper posterior and lower posterior periapical radiographs were taken by wall-type 1 and portable type 3 intraoral x-ray machines. Thermoluminescent dosemeters were placed at 23 sites at the layers of the tissue-equivalent ART woman phantom for dosimetry. Average tissue absorbed dose and radiation weighted dose were calculated for each major anatomical site. Effective dose was calculated using 2005 ICRP tissue weighted factors. Results: On 14 full mouth periapical radiographs, the effective dose for wall-type x-ray machine was 30 Sv; for portable x-ray machines were 30 Sv, 22 Sv, 36 Sv. On upper posterior radiograph, the effective dose for wall-type x-ray machine was 4 Sv; for portable x-ray machines doses were 4 Sv, 3 Sv, 5 Sv. On lower posterior radiograph, the effective dose for wall type x-ray machine was 5 Sv; for portable x-ray machines doses were 4 Sv, 4 Sv, 5 Sv. Conclusion: Effective doses for periapical radiographs performed by portable intraoral x-ray machines were similar to doses for periapical radiographs taken by wall type intraoral x-ray machines.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.167-176
• /
• 2018

Purpose: In the age of X-ray computed tomography (CT) and digital volume tomography (DVT), with their outstanding post-processing capabilities, indications for planar radiography for the study of the dentition of ancient Egyptian mummies may easily be overlooked. In this article, the advantages and limitations of different approaches and projections are discussed for planar oral and maxillofacial radiography using portable digital X-ray equipment during archaeological excavations. Furthermore, recommendations are provided regarding projections and sample positioning in this context. Materials and Methods: A total of 55 specimens, including 19 skeletonized mandibles, 14 skeletonized skulls, 18 separate mummified heads, and 4 partially preserved mummies were imaged using portable digital X-ray equipment in the course of archaeological excavations led by the University of Basel in the Valley of the Kings between 2009 and 2012. Images were evaluated by 2 authors with regard to the visibility of diagnostically relevant dental structures using a 4-point grading system(Likert scale). Results: Overall, the visibility of diagnostically relevant dental structures was rated highest by both authors on X-ray images acquired using a dental detector. The tube-shift technique in the lateral projections of mandibular dentition achieved the second-best rating, and lateral projections achieved the third-best rating. Conclusion: Conventional planar digital X-ray imaging, due to its ubiquity, remains an excellent method-and often the only practicable one-for examining the skulls and teeth of ancient Egyptian mummies under field conditions. Radiographic images of excellent diagnostic quality can be obtained, if an appropriate methodology regarding the selected projections and sample placement is followed.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.42 no.1
• /
• pp.1-4
• /
• 2012

Purpose : Hand-held dental x-ray system is a self contained x-ray machine designed to perform intraoral radiography with one or two hands. The issue about its usage as general dental radiography is still in dispute. The aim of the present study was to assess the relationship between the amount of battery charge and the tube voltage in different handheld dental x-ray systems. Materials and Methods : Seven hand-held dental x-ray units were used for the study. Tube voltage was measured with Unfors ThinX RAD (Unfors Instruments AB, Billdal, Sweden) for 3 consecutive exposures at the different amount of battery charge of each unit. The average and the deviation percentage of measured kV from indicated kV of each unit were calculated. Results : Tube voltage of only 1 unit was 70 kV (indicated by manufacturer) and those of the others were 60 kV. Tube voltage deviation percentage from the indicated kV at the fully charged battery was from 2.5% to -5.5% and from -0.8% to -10.0% at the lowest charged battery. Conclusion : Tube voltages of all units decreased as the residual amount of the battery charge decreased. It is suggested that the performance test for hand-held x-ray system should be performed for the minimum residual charged battery as well as the full charged one. Persistent battery charging is suggested to maintain the proper tube voltage of the hand-held portable x-ray system.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.39 no.4
• /
• pp.651-660
• /
• 2016

Due to recent population aging, the number of check-up for senior citizens has increased steadily. According to this trend, the market size of dental X-ray equipment and the number of approval and review for these devices have simultaneously increased. The technical document of medical device is required for approval and review for medical device, and medical device companies needs to have work comprehension and expertise, as the document needs to include the overall contents such as performances, test criteria, etc.. Yet, since most of domestic manufacturers or importers of medical devices are small businesses, it is difficult for them to recruit professional manpower for approval of medical devices, and submission of inaccurate technical documents has increased. These problems lead to delay of the approval process and to difficulties in quick entering into the market. Especially, the Ministry of Food and Drug safety (MFDS) standards of a dental extra-oral X-ray equipment, a dental intra-oral X-ray equipment, an arm-type computed tomography, and a portable X-ray system have been recently enacted or not. this guideline of dental X-ray equipment adjusting revised standards was developed to help relative companies and reviewers. For this study, first, the methods to write technical document have been reviewed with revised international and domestic regulations and system. Second, the domestic and foreign market status of each item has been surveyed and analyzed. Third, the contents of technical documents already approved by MFDS have been analyzed to select the correct example, test items, criteria, and methods. Finally, the guideline has been developed based on international and domestic regulation, through close review of a consultative body composed of academic, industrial, research institute and government experts.