• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.75-82
• /
• 2022

Background: Dental hygienists study dental radiology through the dental hygiene department and curriculum, and most of the radiography work in dental clinics is performed by dental hygienists; however, the legal work regulations for dental hygienists place restrictions on the type of radiography performed. This study aimed to identify the actual conditions of the radiographic work performed by dental hygienists and to determine the difference according to the type of hospital. Methods: This study included 195 dental hygienists working at dental medical institutions in the metropolitan area. A survey was conducted on regarding the radiographic work performed and the clinical career of the main performers. The radiography work was divided into periapical radiography, bite-wing radiography, occlusal radiography, panoramic radiography, computed tomography (CT), and cephalometric radiography. Results: The frequency of performing intraoral radiography was as follows: periapical radiography, 94.9%; bite-wing radiography, 93.8%; and occlusal radiography, 77.9%. The frequency of performing extraoral radiography was 94.4% for panoramic radiography, 89.7% for CT, and 73.3% for cephalometric radiography. The frequency of internal and external radiography performance was higher among hygienists in dental clinics than among those in dental hospitals and university hospitals. The analysis of the dental hygienists' clinical experience in the areas of intraoral and extraoral radiography showed that those working at university hospitals, dental hospitals, and dental clinics had over 5 years, 2~4 years, and 1 year of clinical experience, respectively. The hygienists with less than 1 year of clinical experience showed high performance frequency (p<0.05). Conclusion: For the dental hygienists to perform radiography safely, a discussion regarding the revision of related laws and regulations is warranted.

• Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.111-124
• /
• 2009

This study analyzes through the review of literature and laws the exposure time, clinical frequency, and radiation exposure of intraoral and extraoral radiography as well as of panoramic radiography performed by dental hygienists in dental clinics, compares the dental radiology curriculums of radiological science and dental hygiene departments, and proposes the expansion of dental hygienists' radiography operations. The radiology curriculums were compared between the radiological science and dental hygiene departments of colleges. For new analysis by radiography for dental diagnosis, the exposure time, radiation absorbed dose, effective dose, and number of days of natural radiation were compared by the type of oral radiation films and radiographical techniques proposed by domestic and international studies. The exposure time of panoramic radiography is 15 seconds and it takes about two minutes for completion, whereas the exposure time of the standard radiography is 0.2~0.8 seconds and it takes 10 times longer for completion of the radiography of full mouth than the panoramic radiography. The standard radiography can cause distortions of radiation at severely curved parts of dental arch and palatopharyngeal reflex. However, panoramic radiography can be performed even for lock jaw patients, causes less inconvenience to patients and is much simpler than the standard radiography. The percentage of dental clinics where radiography is performed by dental hygienists was 92.0%, and the percentage of standard film radiography by dental hygienists was 98% whereas the percentage of panoramic radiography by dental hygienists was 92%. For the absorbed dose which is an indicator of radiation exposure, the When the effective dose which is an indicator of the danger of radiation exposure was converted to the number of days of natural radiation, it was 3.3 days for panoramic radiography, but 13.9 days for the full mouth standard radiography by bisecting angle technique which was 4.2 times longer than the panoramic radiography. There were two colleges that had a dental radiology course with two credits in the departments of radiological science. The credits for dental radiology courses in the department of dental hygiene ranged varied by college, ranging from 3 to 8; on average, the theory course was 2.2 credits and the practice course was 2.02 credits. To summarize the above results, the percentage of dental clinics where panoramic radiography is performed by dental hygienists under the guidance of dentists is high. Panoramic radiography has become an essential facility for dental clinics. It is faster than standard film radiography and less dangerous due to low radiation exposure. Panoramic radiography is a simple mechanical job that does not require training of oral radiography by radiotechnologist. Because panoramic radiography is one of major operations which must be performed at all times in dental clinics, it must be designated as intraoral technique rather than extraoral technique, or legalized for inclusion in the scope of operations of dental hygienists.

• Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene
• /
• v.18 no.6
• /
• pp.1013-1023
• /
• 2018

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to evaluate dental hygiene students' recognition of safety management and phantom practice in dental radiology. Methods: The study subjects were 409 students in six regions who completed a dental radiology practice course and had on-job experience more than once. After understanding the study purpose and contents, they answered a questionnaire. The main jobs in dental radiology were analyzed. Results: As a result, regarding the most difficult aspects of dental radiology practice, "it is impossible to irradiate the mouth directly with X-rays" was the most common response (29.1%). Regarding the question "what is the main role of students in dental radiology practice?", the answer "it is shooting simulations using phantoms" accounted for 59.7% of responses. The most difficult regions in bisecting and paralleling radiography with a phantom were found to be the maxillary & mandibular molars and premolars. The most difficult technique was reported to be locating XCP maintenance to fit inside the mouth for both molars and premolars. The most difficult region to perform bitewing radiography using the phantom was the molar region (2.87), and the most difficult to perform occlusal radiography approaches were maxillary anterior general occlusal radiography (2.92) and mandibular cross-sectional occlusal radiography (3.00). Conclusions: The most technically difficult point in bitewing and occlusal radiography was the correct positioning of the vertical and horizontal angles. Radiography practice was considered to be more effective than previous mutual practice in terms of analysis of anatomical structures and patient treatment methods. Therefore, it will be necessary to improve policy regarding dental radiography practice at the department of dental hygienics and revise the necessary laws and regulations.

• Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene
• /
• v.17 no.5
• /
• pp.721-733
• /
• 2017

Objectives: This study was conducted to help reduce the anxiety about dental radiation exposures of people and to provide a way to instill proper awareness of dental radiation. Methods: To fulfill the research aim, this study conducted a survey to 330 subjects who are 20 years old or over living in Seoul and Gyeonggi-do during the month of December 2016. The collected data were analyzed using frequency analysis, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson's correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis among others. Results: As a result of examining the correlation between the anxiety of dental radiography and the correlations between the variables showed that the knowledge of radiation knowledge and the need for radiography (r=0.186, p<0.01), thinking about shooting (r=0.137, p<0.05), and the effectiveness of wearing protective equipment (r=0.120, p<0.01), showing statistically significant differences. As a result of examining the factors influencing anxiety of dental radiography among adults, high awareness of the need for dental radiography (p<0.01), the more the idea of dental anxiety in dental radiography is radiography showed higher (p<0.01). Conclusions: It seems proper that adequate dental radiography requires adequate explanation about it to patients, wearing of protective equipment, and appropriate dental radiation safety education.

• Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.527-537
• /
• 2014

Objectives : The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of the awareness towards dental radiation exposure and concern in the adults. Methods : A self-reported questionnaires was filled out by 470 adults over 19 years old in Seoul from May 16 to July 10, 2013. Results : Fear for dental radiography showed that those who positively thought of radiography had 2.86 folds necessity of radiography than those who did not. Positive responders worried about the hazards of dental radiation 4.64 folds than the negative responders. More worried responders had felt the radiation hazards 1.83 folds than those who worried less. The worried responders also had higher awareness of dental radiation hazards. Conclusions : Frequent use of dental radiography is able to be prevented by protective devices. So it is important to prevent the possible hazards of the dental radiography by personal protective education.

• 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.35 no.4
• /
• pp.203-205
• /
• 2005

Purpose: This study was aimed to compare skin entrance dose of digital radiography with that of film radiography and to show the dose reduction achievement with digital systems at 11 dental schools in Korea. Materials and Methods: Forty six intraoral radiographic systems in 11 dental schools were included in this study. Digital sensors were used in 33 systems and film was used in 13 systems. Researchers and the volunteer visited 11 dental schools in Korea. Researchers asked the radiologic technician (s) at each school to set the exposure parameters and aiming the x-ray tube for the periapical view of the mandibular molar of the volunteer. The skin entrance doses were measured at the same exposure parameters and distance by the technician for each system with a dosimeter (Multi-O-Meter : Unfors instruments, Billdal, Sweden). Results: The median dose was $491.2{\mu}Gy$ for digital radiography and $1,205.0{\mu}Gy$ for film radiography. The skin entrance dose in digital radiography was significantly lower than that of film radiography (p<0.05). Conclusion: Fifty-nine percent skin entrance dose reduction with digital periapical radiography was achieved over the film radiography in Korean dental schools.

• Journal of information and communication convergence engineering
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.274-278
• /
• 2019

It is important that students are provided opportunities to practice their skills in acquiring radiographic images. However, these opportunities are currently limited because of the risk of radiation exposure. To overcome this limitation, a new augmented reality-based radiography simulator was developed that enables students to practice radiographic techniques as part of self-directed learning without time and space constraints. Subsequently, cross-sectional images of a manikin phantom head obtained via computed tomography were reconstructed into a three-dimensional object. An image marker that could be recognized by a mobile device and could allow users to practice dental radiography techniques was devised. The three-dimensional object was augmented to the mobile device; consequently, among 106 stored dental radiographs on the device, a radiograph corresponding to specific imaging conditions was opened when users performed radiographic procedures. This technology could improve dental students' understanding of dental anatomy and contribute to improving their competency in acquiring dental radiographs.

• 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.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.237-242
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The objectives of this study were to survey the radiographic exposure parameters, to measure the patient doses for intraoral dental radiography nationwide, and thus to establish the diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in intraoral dental X-ray examination in Korea. Materials and Methods: One hundred two intraoral dental radiographic machines from all regions of South Korea were selected for this study. Radiographic exposure parameters, size of hospital, type of image receptor system, installation duration of machine, and type of dental X-ray machine were documented. Patient entrance doses (PED) and dose-area products (DAP) were measured three times at the end of the exit cone of the X-ray unit with a DAP meter (DIAMENTOR M4-KDK, PTW, Freiburg, Germany) for adult mandibular molar intraoral dental radiography, and corrections were made for room temperature and pressure. Measured PED and DAP were averaged and compared according to the size of hospital, type of image receptor system, installation duration, and type of dental X-ray machine. Results: The mean exposure parameters were 62.6 kVp, 7.9 mA, and 0.5 second for adult mandibular molar intraoral dental radiography. The mean patient dose was 2.11 mGy (PED) and 59.4 $mGycm^2$ (DAP) and the third quartile one 3.07 mGy (PED) and 87.4 $mGycm^2$ (DAP). Doses at university dental hospitals were lower than those at dental clinics (p<0.05). Doses of digital radiography (DR) type were lower than those of film-based type (p<0.05). Conclusion: We recommend 3.1 mGy (PED), 87.4 $mGycm^2$ (DAP) as the DRLs in adult mandibular molar intraoral dental radiography in Korea.