• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.41 no.4
• /
• pp.143-150
• /
• 2011

Purpose : The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images and bitewing images in detection of secondary caries. Materials and Methods : One hundred and twenty proximal slots of Class II cavities were randomly prepared on human premolar and molar teeth, and restored with amalgam (n=60) and composite resin (n=60). Then, artificial secondary caries lesions were randomly created using round steel No. 4 bur. The teeth were radiographed with a conventional bitewing technique and two CBCT systems; Pax-500ECT and Promax 3D. All images were evaluated by five observers. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve ($A_z$) was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy. Significant difference was tested using the Friedman test (p value<0.05). Results : The mean $A_z$ values for bitewing, Pax-500ECT, and Promax 3D imaging systems were 0.882, 0.995, and 0.978, respectively. Significant differences were found between the two CBCT systems and film (p=0.007). For CBCT systems, the axial plane showed the greatest $A_z$ value. Conclusion : Based on the design of this study, CBCT images were better than bitewing radiographs in detection of secondary caries.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.27 no.3 s.62
• /
• pp.421-430
• /
• 1997

Alveolar bone grows with development of tooth germs and roots; bone deposition occurs with tooth eruption. Bone components undergoes processes of resorption and deposition, and when the balance between them is disrupted, decrease in alveolar bone height or excessive bone deposition result. It has been hon that repositioning of teeth through orthodontic treatment can cause alveolar bone resorption which result in decreased alveolar bone height, and there have been many studies to evaluate such effects. X-ray films that could be replicated and standardized were chosen in clinical studies, and among them, bitewing films were used for objective evaluation of changes in alveolar bone level. Twenty subjects, 10 to 13-year- old (average 12.2) children with Cl I molar key, healthy oral condition, no congenital missing, no periodontal disease, and pre-and post-orthodontic bitewing films, were randomly selected for comparison of alveolar bone heights. Amounts of tooth and changes in alveolar bone heights were analyzed. The following results were obtained: 1. Amount of tooth movement in canine, premolar, and molar regions, changes in tooth axis, and changes in alveolar bone heights were measured, and the mean and median values were obtained. 2. When pre-and post-orthodontic alveolar bone levels were compared, larger changes were noticed in maxilla than mandible. 3. When mesio-distally compared, larger changes were observed in the distal sides of 3D3 and 4M3, mesial sides of 4M3 and 4D3, distal sides of 4D3 and 5M3, mesial sides of 5M3 and 5D3, md distal sides of 5D3 and 6M3. 4. When the amounts of tooth movements(TX, TY)and changes in tooth axis(A) were compared,34TX, 34TY, 34A of both sides in maxilla were greater, iud changes in alveolar bone level were greater than any other region.

• Journal of Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.63-68
• /
• 1980

The purpose of this article is to re-examine the roentgenographic appearance of alveolar osseous in an effort to determine the value of the orthopantomogram in the diagnosis of periodontal disease. A total of 158 osseous lesions from 13 human dry skulls were studied. 14 Ultra-speed periapical films, 2 bitewing films and Kodak panoramic film are used to obtain radiographs of all defects. The bisecting technic was used, with a target-film distance of. 8 inches and exposure factors of 70 kVp, 10MA and 0.4 sec. at anterior teeth, 0.6 see at posterior teeth in exposure time. For orthopantomogram, Panoura Eight-C was used with a exposure factors of 90kVp, 10MA. and 15sec. exposure time. All films were developed in a light. tight darkroom at 68°F for 4½ minutes. Comparison of orthopantomogram and intraoral films on the view-box was carefully studied in relation to the types of osseous defect visually evident; Proximal intraosseous defects, Interproximal craters, Interproximal hemisepta, Furcal defects on multirooted teeth, and Facial or Lingual one-walled defects. The results obtained were as follows; 1. Proximal osseous defects throughout the dental arches and furcal defects on facial and lingual surfaces of multirooted teeth can be identified with a high degree of accuracy from their orthopantomographic appearances. 2. Lesions on facial or lingual surface of the alveolar arches are rather difficult to locate or recognize on the dental radiographs. 3. In determining whether the proximal and furcal lesions are located facially or lingually, Orthopantomogram is superior to the conventional film Orthopantomogram obtained with standardization of head in proper position revealed the complete visualization of alveolar bone without showing occlusal surface of molars and proximal superimposition of teeth. Thus, on the standardized orthopantomograms, The roentgenographic characteristics of each defect were determined.

• Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.49-64
• /
• 2004

This study is designed to conduct a questionnaire research into the safety control and the actual condition of radiography by working with dentistry belonging to university hospitals, dental hospitals and dental clinics for three months ranging from August, 2003 to October, 2003. The researcher came to the following conclusions. 1. The research on the current condition of possessed radiational equipment shows that 61.2 percent of the subjects had one intraoral radiation medicine and that 70.1 percent of the subjects had more than one extraoral radiation medicine and that 37.3 percent of the subjects had more than one digital radiation medicine. 2. Most of intraoral radiography (82.1%) was conducted by dental hygienists, and 7.5 percent of intraoral radiography was conducted by nurse aids. On the other hand, most of extraoral radiography (76.6%) was conducted by dental hygienists and digital radiography was conducted by dental hygienists(60.6%), dentists(32.0%) and radiographer(80.0%). 3. The less-than 1-meter-long distance between cone and the radiographer accounted for 44.8 percent. And the more-than 1.6-meter-long distance accounted for no more than 13.4 percent. The exposure time per standard film which was adjusted to each part accounted for 71.6 percent. Fixing the film on the part of healthy patients accounted for 76.1 percent. Fixing the film of elderly patients and children patients by the radiographer accounted for 43.3 percent. 4. The average daily photographing frequency of standard films stood at six to ten pieces(31.3%), and the average weekly photographing frequency of bitewing films stood at less than one piece(47.8%), and the dentistries where bitewing films were not employed accounted for 25.4%. The subjects whose average weekly photographing freqeuncy of occlusal films stood at less than a piece accounted for 59.7 percent. The dentistries whose average weekly photographing frequency of pediatric films stood at one to five pieces accounted for 41.8 percent. In case of panorama & cephalo, one to five pieces on a weekly average accounted for 36.2 percent. The dentistries whose average daily photographing frequency of digital radiation medicine stood at less than 1 piece accounted for 40.0 percent. 5. The research on the use of protective clothes shows that pregnant ·women only accounted for 31.3 percent. In regard to the use of protective clothes in case of the radiographers fixing films, the cases where no protective clothes were employed accounted for 88.1 percent. The reason was said to he attributable to the trouble related to wearing the clothes(54.2%). 6. The survey on the measurement of exposure dose shows that the cases where no measurement was made accounted for 76.1 percent. As far as the measurement methods of exposure dose was concerned, the employment of film badge accounted for 68.8 percent. The subjects turned out to conduct measurement of exposure dose every third month, which accounted for 43.8 percent. The barriers to the measurement of measurement of exposure dose were attributable to the recognition that a little amount of exposure dose need not be measured(29.9%). 7. The survey on the distinction of radiation rooms and clinic rooms reveals that the cases where radiation rooms exclusively existed accounted for 67.2 percent. 43.3 percent of the subjects turned out to have only one protective garment, and 49.3 percent of the subjects proved to conduct a periodical checkup of radiational equipment. The survey on the examination certificates of radiational generators and protective facilities indicates that 80.6 percent of the subjects had the certificates. The research also shows that the subjects with the marks indicating the radiational areas accounted for 70.1 percent. And trustees turned out to handle developing solutions and fixing solutions.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.43-54
• /
• 2000

This paper will present the result of research which was done with 201 places on the actual condition of using dental diagnostic radiography unit and the protection of radiography. The purpose of this paper is to comprehend the actual condition of using dental x-ray unit and to protect when they do radiation work. Moreover this paper was completed to prepare basic materials that could be helpful to reduce the exposure from radiation. This paper obtains the following result. 1. On radiation photographing work in the dentist office, 50.3% of dental hygienists treat this job, and 19.2% of assistants, 10.8% of dentists, 5.6% of radiolotechnologists and 4.2% others performed this job. 2. The case that radiation worker is educated about diagnostic radiography safety supervision has been shown 14.4% and uneducated case has been shown 78.1%. 3. The result about the actual condition of using the oral diagnostic radiation per day was that a number of film which take photograph again (less than 1 exposure) was 40.3%. Normal photographing($1{\sim}10$ exposure) was 85.1% which is the highest percentage. Using the bitewing film and occlusal film was 7.0%, and 12.4% respectively. The percent that they use cephalo film and panoramic film was 16.4% 29.8% respectively. 4. Dental intra diagnostic radiography unit made in $1996{\sim}2000$ was 24.9% and the one made in $1991{\sim}1995$ was 19.9%, in $1986{\sim}1990$ was 19.9%, in 1985 was 9.5% according to the answer. On kVp, they use 60 kVp mostly(61.7%) and On mA, they use 10 mA with the highest percent(66.7%). On the dental extra diagnostic radiography units which are used for doing the extra oral radiography, the one made in $1996{\sim}2000$ was 13.4%, in $1991{\sim}1995$ was 9.5%, in $1985{\sim}1990$ was 2.0% according to the answer. They use $71{\sim}80\;kVp$ with 10.9% and $60{\sim}75\;kVP$ with 9.5%. They use less than 10 mA with 19.4% and $11{\sim}15\;mA$ with 2.5%. $16{\sim}20\;mA$ with 1.5%. But the case they exactly do not know how much mA they use or they do not have any mA was 76.6%. 5. General characteristics and the part of protection through the protective equipment by operator are completed with 89.1%. They have shown the similar difference in the relationship with age(p<0.001), experience(p<0.05) and in-patient(p<0.05). 6. When they take photographs of radiation with general quality, how far they keep the proper distance from the cone is as follows, Keeping safe distance is 12.9% according to the answer with the low percent. This result is similar with the difference related in experience(p<0.05) and work(p<0.05), the area of working(p<0.05) and in-patient(p<0.05). 7. The answer about the question-if they hold the tube head when they take photographs with general characteristics is as follows. The answer that they never hold the tube head and cone occupies 62.7% with the highest percent. It is shown the similar difference with age(p<0.05). 8. According to the study that they put on dosimeter with general characteristics is as follows. 64.7% has never put on the dosimester with the highest percent. 33.8% showed similar differences with experience(p<0.05), work(p<0.001), the area of work(p<0.005)and in-patient(p<0.001).

• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.83-88
• /
• 2005

In spite of relatively low level of radiation dose used at dental clinics, long term exposure may be harmful, so radiation workers at dental clinics must be well aware of its danger. This study was radiation safety management by dental hygienists in order to take preventive measures for dental hygienists and suggest ideas to develop radiation safety training programs. For this, we contacted dental hygienists working at the local dental clinics for 4 months from December of 2003 to march of 2004 and obtained the following findings. 1. Regarding the intraoral radiographic method, the average daily photographing frequency of standard films stood at one to five pieces (47.5%), and the average weekly photographing frequency of digital radiation medicine stood at less than one piece (69.8%), and the average weekly photographing frequency of bitewing films stood at less than one piece (67.7%), and and the average weekly photographing frequency of occlusal films stood at less than one piece (95.5%), and the dentistries whose average weekly photographing frequency of pediatric films stood at one to five pieces accounted for 47.1 percent. 2. Regarding the extraoral radiographic method, the average weekly photographing frequency of panorama film stood at one to five pieces (63.7%), and less than one piece (20.9%), the average weekly photographing frequency of cephalometric film stood at less than one piece (72.3%), and one to five pieces (20.1%). 3. Concerning the radiation safety management training program, only 18.7% of total 278 surveyed attended the training progra., Attendance tendency of the training program by general characteristics showed statistically significant difference according to age (p<0.01), working experience (p<0.001), and marital status (p<0.01). 4. When asked about the protective equipments against radiation exposure, 40.6% of them said "modest", and 71.1% appeared equipped with led apron as a protective tool.