Selection Criteria for Dental Radiography Faculty of General Dental Practitioners (UK) guidance on indications for radiographic investigation, covering the use of radiographs for the developing dentition, endodontic assessment, caries diagnosis, periodontal assessment, and implantology.

• Dental Radiography Study Guide
• Software Selection Criteria
• Selection Criteria In Dental Radiography Free Pdf

OBJECTIVES:We sought to measure the diagnostic yield of relevance to treatment on routine panoramic radiographs taken of new adult (ie, 18 years and over) patients in general dental practice. STUDY DESIGN:Routine panoramic radiographs (n = 1817) obtained from general dental practice were assessed and radiologic yield recorded using consensus viewing by 2 dental radiologists. A modified diagnostic yield of relevance to treatment for each radiograph was calculated by omission of findings that would have been identified on bilateral posterior bitewing radiographs and of radiologic findings of no relevance to treatment. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was used in attempt to identify clinical indicators of a high diagnostic yield of relevance to treatment. RESULTS:The diagnostic yield of relevance to treatment was zero for the majority (56%) of patients. This figure rose to 71% when the symptom-free patients were considered.

Five clinical indicators for panoramic radiography were identified, as follows: clinical suspicion of teeth with periapical pathologic conditions, presence of partially erupted teeth, clinically evident caries lesions, swelling, and clinically suspected unerupted teeth. CONCLUSION:Routine panoramic radiography of adult dental patients is not supported by the results of this study. The use of clinical indicators to select patients may help to improve diagnostic yield.

ResultsThe frequency of prescription of routine radiographic examination (an example is a panoramic radiograph for screening process for occult disease) was 34.1%, while that of selective radiography was 64.0%. Dentists' discussion of radiation risk and benefit with patients was infrequent. More than half of the operators held the image receptor by themselves during intraoral radiographic examinations. Lead apron/thyroid collars for patient protection were used by fewer than 22% of dental offices. Rectangular collimation was utilized by fewer than 15% of dental offices. IntroductionAlthough the diagnostic information provided by radiographs may be of definite benefit to the patient, the radiographic examination carries the potential for harm from ionizing radiation inducing carcinogenesis. A statistical association between X-ray exposures in dentistry and increased incidence of salivary gland tumors, thyroid cancer, and intracranial meningioma has been reported.Although the radiation doses used by dentists might be low for individual examinations, patients are exposed to repeated examinations over time, and many people are exposed during the course of dental care.

1. .Assess each radiograph taken according to the table below Rating Quality Basis 1 Excellent No errors in exposure, positioning or processing 2 Diagnostically acceptable Some errors in exposure, positioning or processing which do not detract from the diagnostic use of the radiograph 3 Unacceptable Errors of exposure, positioning or processing which.
2. The programme needs to be done in conjunction with Radiography (Regulations Update 2018) to reflect the recent UK legislation changes to both of these regulations. Learning content. This elearning programme is aimed at all members of the dental team involved in radiography as part of their clinical duties.

The unregulated habit of taking of dental radiographs based on a single frequency for all patients could lead to unnecessary patient exposure.The justification and optimization of radiography is now an important issue for dental practitioners in terms of reducing radiation dose. The selection criteria for radiographs in dentistry has been revised recently in accordance with guidelines and peer-reviewed research materials of USA and Europe,- but little has been published on this subject in Korea. To date, many types of equipment and techniques have been developed in dental radiography to reduce patients' exposure dose. Good radiologic examination practice includes appropriate collimation, use of a lead apron and thyroid collar as well as application of objective selection criteria.There has been no internationally published data about the attitudes of dentists in Korea regarding radiation safety regulations.

The aim of this study was to survey the attitude of Korean dentists regarding radiation safety and use of dental radiography selection criteria. Materials and MethodsA total of 267 Korean dentists participated in this study. Among them, 67 dentists were recruited from the attendees of the 2012 Fall Science Meeting of Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Two hundred additional dentists participated through a web-based survey system. Five questions were asked about radiation protection of patients and operators during dental radiograph examinations. The topics included: 1.

Prescriptions of dental radiographs A) routine examinations, 'routine' means the predetermined initial radiographic examination on new patients seeking comprehensive care. The example of routine is a panoramic radiograph as part of screening process for occult disease, or the full-mouth periapical+ bitewing+ panoramic radiographies combination regardless of signs and symptoms. B) selective radiographic examinations based upon the patient's clinical signs, symptoms, and history using selection criteria, C) imaging based on the 2004 Food and Drug Administration-American Dental Association (FDA-ADA) guideline compliance, D) the frequency of bitewing radiography. The frequency of communication with patients 3.

Intraoral image receptor use A) type of image receptor (digital sensor/film) B) placement of image receptor in patient's mouth. The use of lead apron/thyroid collar 5. The use of rectangular collimation. Among these factors, image receptor placement was the factor closely related to operator protection. The detailed questions were as follows.1. Prescription of dental radiographsA) Do you routinely prescribe radiographic examinations or choose to make selective radiography based on any guideline when new patients come to your dental clinic?B) Do you regularly use bitewing radiographs?2.

Communication with patientsA) How often do you encounter patient questions about radiation safety?B) How often do you explain radiation risk/benefit to patients and acquire patient consent before taking radiographs?3. Image receptorA) Which receptor do you use among film, digital sensor, and photostimulable phosphor (PSP) plate?B) Regarding the image receptor placement, who usually holds the film/digital receptor in patient's mouth during the intraoral X-ray exposure?4. The use of lead apron or thyroid collarsDo you always cover patients with lead apron or thyroid collar during radiographic examinations?5.

Rectangular collimationDo you regularly use a rectangular collimator during intraoral radiographic examinations?The respondents were classified into two groups including general dentists (n=240) and specialists of oral and maxillofacial radiology (n=27, formally trained or being trained by residency program). The purpose of this classification was to determine whether the specialists were more informed about radiation safety. The frequency of communication with patientsPatients asked about radiation hazards once or twice a month for 18.7% of respondents while patient inquiries were once or twice a year for 48.4% of the respondents.

Patients asked no questions about radiation hazards for 30% of the practitioners. 'Occasional' explanation of radiation risk/benefit to patients was provided by 63.2% of the dentists; however, 30.2% of the dentists never explained radiation risk/benefit to patients.

Of the dentists who never discussed radiation risk with patients 14.8% were the specialists compared with 32.0% of the general dentists. DiscussionRadiation protection of patients in dental radiology is related to the following factors: the appropriate selection criteria, equipment and film, and quality assurance programs.

The most significant dose-associated factor is patient selection criteria. Patients who are likely to benefit from a particular radiographic examination are identified according to the selection criteria based on patient signs, symptoms, and history. In the 1950's, most dental schools in the United States (US) took full mouth intra-oral radiographic examinations as a diagnostic aid and screening tool. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) then began to develop the risk/benefit concept. This concept suggested that all intentional exposure to a patient must be justified and be kept as low as possible. The American Dental Association (ADA) recently emphasized the necessity of using a specific type and frequency of radiographic examination over the previous concept of radiographic examination as a routine procedure. However, still, 'As Low As Reasonably Achievable, ALARA)' principles are not strictly applied in the dental field, Many US and Canadian dental schools continue to obtain radiographic examinations routinely with new patients before a clinical exam.

Dental Radiography Study Guide

Among Canadian dental schools, the generalized use of routine radiography was common for dentate adult patients and the use of selective radiography was uncommon.In the present study, one third of Korean dentists made predetermined routine radiographic examinations while selective radiography was performed by 64.0% and FDA-ADA selection criteria by 1.9%. This result suggested that routine radiographic examination was relatively common and selection criteria guideline compliance was very low. It seems that little attention has been paid to radiographic selection criteria by dentists in Korea.

Other type of radiographic examination such as panoramic radiography might also be carried out more frequently than needed. Routine radiographic examinations might increase patient exposure unnecessarily. Dentists could reduce radiation exposure by adopting patient selection guidelines., Radiographic examination should be decided according to the professional judgment of the dentist, taking into considering the type, frequency, and extent of the area to be examined. Periodic evaluation and revision, when indicated, of selection criteria guidelines is recommended for the safe use of dental radiography in Korea.In this study, 30.2% of of respondents had not experienced patients' asking about radiation safety at all. While 32.0% of the general dentists had no experience explaining radiation risk/benefit to patients, even 14.8% of specialists had no such experience. Dentists should explain the treatment plan to the patient so that the patients can be involved in treatment decisions. Patients should be informed of possible untoward results of the treatment and have the right to refuse the proposed intervention.

Patients have the right to take part in clinical decision making after being informed of significant risks, benefits, and alternatives.Bitewing radiography is well known for high detectability of interproximal caries and is also useful for evaluating the periodontal condition. However, the results of the present study showed that only 35% of respondents performed bitewing radiography limitedly. Korean dentists might be unaware of the value and recommended frequency of bitewing radiographs.Many Korean dentists (77.2%) were using digital sensors despite the high cost of this type of equipment.

The fact that many Korean dentists used digital intraoral sensors without receptor holders might be related to the relatively bulky thickness of digital sensors as compared to intraoral film. In addition, dentists who wanted to reduce the re-taking of radiographs due to a positioning error might hold the image receptor despite the radiation hazard. The present study showed that 60% of operators held the image receptor themselves during intraoral radiographic examinations. Operators should not hold the image receptor during exposure. The preferred method for operator protection would be to position the receptor with a holding device and to stand behind a protective barrier or outside the room during radiographic exposure.Lead aprons and thyroid shields are patient-protective equipment that minimizes exposure from scattered radiation. However, protection of the abdomen has little relevance to dental radiation protection since scattered radiation to the gonadal area is small that the risk of hereditary effects is negligible.

The use of a lead apron on patients may not be required if National Council for Radiation Protection & Measurements (NCRP) recommendations are followed strictly. The risk of long-term health effects from low dose exposure is uncertain. There has been some evidences that radiation exposure to the thyroid during pregnancy is associated with low birth weight. Protective thyroid collars substantially reduce radiation exposure to the thyroid during dental radiographic procedures.

Software Selection Criteria

The present study showed that only 21.7% of dentists draped lead apron/thyroid collar over patients, indicating that a relatively high percentage of dentists were unaware of the potential of thyroid exposure or the possibility of minimizing this with the use of a thyroid collar/shield. Since every reasonable precaution should be taken to minimize radiation exposure, protective thyroid collars and aprons should be used whenever possible. This is recommended for all patients, especially for children, women of childbearing age, and pregnant women.The field size is one of the most important factors in dose reduction and the frequency of retakes. Restricting the X-ray beam to only the receptor area can prevent unnecessary patient exposure. By replacing round collimation with rectangular collimation, the effective dose would be reduced by almost 60%. Rectangular collimation did not significantly affect the diagnostic yield of radiographs despite the increase in minor cone cuts. The present study showed that 14.6% of Korean dentists used rectangular collimation.

The percentage of dentists using rectangular collimators varied by country including Sweden (29%), Belgium (6%), Turkey (5.5%), and Canada (8%). Dentists can create rectangular beams by inserting a rectangular windowed piece of metal into the round position-indicating device (PID).

Rectangular collimation can also be achieved with either a rectangular positioning-indicating device, or a rectangular collimator clipped to the aiming ring. Unfortunately, some Korean dentists might believe that collimation is inherent components of the tube housing of an X-ray machine. This misunderstanding could be related to the low rate of use of rectangular collimation of 14.6%.Previous studies have reported differences between specialists and general dentists with regard to the use of rectangular collimation and selection criteria. The results of the current study suggested that specialists were more knowledgeable about selection criteria and radiation safety; however, even specialists showed little interest in explaining radiation risks and benefits to patients, utilizing bitewing technique, or applying rectangular collimation.The majority of Korean dentists in this study did not currently follow the good radiological practices including the application of selection criteria, explanation of radiation risk and benefit, proper image receptor holding, and use of rectangular collimation. This study might provide the foundation for more detailed studies that would assess the attitudes toward radiation safety and quality assurance.

Selection Criteria In Dental Radiography Free Pdf

Continuing education on radiation safety would be required for dental health care providers. Also, the development of Korean dental radiography selection criteria would be also recommended.