The reliability of tablet computers in depicting maxillofacial radiographic landmarks

Exposure and protection protocols of dentomaxillofacial imaging applied by paediatric dentists in Europe

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate exposure and protection practices regarding dentomaxillofacial imaging among pediatric dentists in Europe and determine the effect of different clinician specific characteristics on their implementation.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study involving an electronic questionnaire addressed to paediatric dentists, participating in a seminar on dental radiology organized by the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry. Participants were asked to respond to questions regarding dentomaxillofacial imaging in terms of applied radiation dose, adoption of radiation protection techniques, and different patterns of radiographic studying and exchange between patients and colleagues. Data analysis was performed and distribution of responses was tested using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

A total of 151 paediatric dentists, 119 females and 32 males, with a mean chronological age of 42.8 years (s.e. 11.3 years), successfully completed the questionnaire (response rate = 82%). Regardless of the type of radiograph, majority of respondents (68%), reported that they perform the radiographs themselves, while 21% reported that they refer the patients. Half of the respondents (51%), indicated requesting a small (localized) field of view (FOV) when referring for a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) with only a small proportion (11%) reporting a large (maxillofacial) FOV. Thyroid collars and optimizing exposure settings were the most commonly reported patient protection measures used. Lastly, paediatric dentists have adopted the latest technological capacities for the study of dental images.

CONCLUSIONS

Dentomaxillofacial imaging protection and exposure protocols used are common among paediatric dentists with none of their specific characteristics having a significant effect.

Accuracy and tracing time of cephalometric analyses on a tablet or desktop computer : A prospective study

BACKGROUND

This prospective study aimed to evaluate the influence of the computer type (tablet or desktop) on accuracy and tracing time of cephalometric analyses.

METHODS

Dental students used a web-based application specifically developed for this purpose to perform cephalometric analyses on tablet and desktop computers. Landmark locations and timestamps were exported to measure the accuracy, successful detection rate and tracing time. Reference landmarks were established by six experienced orthodontists. Statistical analysis included reliability assessment, descriptive statistics, and linear mixed effect models.

RESULTS

Over a period of 8 semesters a total of 277 cephalometric analyses by 161 students were included. The interrater reliability of the orthodontists establishing the reference coordinates was excellent (ICC > 0.9). For the students, the mean landmark deviation was 2.05 mm and the successful detection rate for the clinically acceptable threshold of 2 mm suggested in the literature was 68.6%, with large variations among landmarks. No effect of the computer type on accuracy and tracing time of the cephalometric analyses could be found.

CONCLUSION

The use of tablet computers for cephalometric analyses can be recommended.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Caries and Periapical Lesions on a Monitor with and without DICOM-GSDF Calibration Under Different Ambient Light Conditions

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of caries and periapical lesions on a monitor with and without DICOM part 14: grayscale standard display function (DICOM-GSDF) calibration under different ambient light conditions. Forty digital bitewing radiographs were selected, with or without radiographic images of carious lesions and forty digital periapical radiographs with or without periapical lesions were selected from archives of the Radiology Department at the University Hospital of the Federal University of Sergipe. The gold standard radiographic images were determined through consensus between two radiologists with more than 15 and 30 years of experience. The selected radiographs were evaluated on a LG LED monitor with and without DICOM-GSDF calibration under different ambient light conditions: Lx1 (low ambient lighting), Lx2 (moderate ambient lighting) and Lx3 (high ambient lighting). Kappa (K_w) values determined that evaluator 1 showed almost perfect agreement for all devices, while evaluator 2 presented a substantial agreement for all devices. Monitors with and without DICOM-GSDF calibration have similar accuracy values. The three ambient light conditions analyzed have similar accuracy and can be used for caries lesions diagnosis (p > 0.05); however, the best diagnostic accuracy of periapical lesions was found in Lx 2. The displays with and without DICOM-GSDF calibration studied in this research have similar accuracy and can be used to evaluate digital radiographs without changing the diagnostic capacity. The different ambient lighting conditions did not influence the evaluation of caries lesions. The best diagnostic accuracy of periapical lesions was found in moderate ambient lighting.

Dental students' levels of understanding normal panoramic anatomy

Background/purpose

In dentistry, panoramic radiography is an important examination technique. The Faculty of Dentistry at Tokushima University educates students about panoramic radiographic anatomical landmarks. The purpose of this study was to investigate differences in the understanding of each panoramic anatomical landmark among students.

Materials and methods

This study analyzed the results of 40 fifth- and 79 sixth-year faculty students who had taken a written examination to clarify their knowledge of anatomical landmarks in 28 panoramic radiographic regions. Anatomical landmarks were classified into 3 categories: <bone structure>, <soft tissue/air layer>, and <ghost images > to compare correct answer rates.

Results

The mean overall correct answer rate by the 119 students for the 28 regions was 53%. The rate did not vary between the 2 academic years. On comparison of the 3 categories, significant differences were only observed between <bone structure> and <soft tissue/air layer>, as the values for the latter were lower. Among the anatomical landmarks, the rates for the condylar head, hyoid bone, panoramic innominate line, styloid process, and nasopalatine line were higher, and those for ghost images of the contralateral nasopalatine line, the cervical vertebrae, mandibular foramen, mastoid air cell, and posterior pharyngeal wall were lower. The values for <soft tissue/air layer>, such as the dorsum of tongue, middle and inferior nasal conche, and middle and inferior nasal meatuses, were also lower.

Conclusion

These results indicate the necessity of improving educational approaches for regions with lower rates of correct answers.

Digital dental radiology in Belgium: a nationwide survey

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to analyse the use of digital dental radiology in Belgium, by focussing on the use of extraoral and intraoral radiographic techniques, digitalisation and image communication.

METHODS

A nationwide survey has been performed amongst Belgian general dentists and dental specialists. Questionnaires were distributed digitally via mailings lists and manually on multiple refresher courses and congresses throughout the country. The overall response rate was 30%.

RESULTS

Overall, 94% of the respondents had access to an intraoral radiographic unit, 76% had access to a panoramic unit, 21% has an attached cephalometric arm. One in five Belgian dentists also seem to have direct access to a cone beam CT. 90% of all intraoral radiography unit worked with digital detectors, while this was 91% for panoramic units (with or without cephalometrics). In 70% of the cases, general dental practitioners with a digital intraoral unit used a storage phosphor plate while in 30% of the cases they used sensor technology (charge-coupled device or complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor). The most common method for professional image transfer appeared to be email. Finally, 16% of all respondents used a calibrated monitor for image analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey indicates that 90% of the respondents, Belgian dentists, make use of digital image techniques. For sharing images, general dental practitioners mainly use methods such as printout and e-mail. The usage of calibrated monitors, however, is not well established yet.

Impact of room lighting and image display device in the radiographic appearances of the endodontic treatments

OBJECTIVES

To assess the radiographic appearances of the endodontic treatment in different room lighting conditions and image display devices.

METHODS

After approval by Research Ethical Board, 20 images were obtained from blocks with one endodontically treated tooth. Of the 20 endodontic treatments conducted in the laboratory, of those the randomly selected 10 teeth (50% of sample) received some quality defect in three parameters-apical limit, adaptation to root canal and homogeneity of the root canal filling material. Digital radiographs (DIGORA® Optime, Soredex, Milwaukee, WI) were obtained, which were evaluated (8 times) by 10 observers in two different conditions of room lighting, with bright (1000 to 1200 lux) and dim light (25 to 50 lux), using two different image display devices, smartphones and laptop computers. The observers assessed the radiographic appearances of the endodontic treatment with respect to quality of each one of three parameters individually. The data of observers' responses in terms of the quality of each parameter were statistically compared using Cronbach's α coefficient, diagnostic tests, π coefficient and ANOVA with Tukey tests, at a significant level setting of 5% (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The mean of reliability of observer responses ranged from 0.89 (intra-evaluator) to 0.66 (inter-evaluator). The mean values of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area were 0.661 (PD = 0.098), with laptop in bright lighting appraising homogeneity of the root canal filling material on the worst performance (ROC area = 0.57), which was statistically significant (p < 0.05), and 0.81 with laptop in dim lighting appraising apical limit on the best performance. Differences (p < 0.05) occurred mainly among parameters used for assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Room lighting and image display devices have very little influence in the radiographic appearances of the endodontic treatment. Thus, we suggest the use of smartphones as an acceptable image display device in daily clinical practice in routine bright lighting conditions.