Repeat analysis of intraoral digital imaging performed by undergraduate students using a complementary metal oxide semiconductor sensor: An institutional case study

Reject Rates of Radiographic Images in Dentomaxillofacial Radiology: A Literature Review

This report surveyed the image reject rates of intra-oral, extra-oral, and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging in the academic literature. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were queried in mid-April 2021. Manual screening of the reference lists of the identified publications was performed to identify papers missed from the database search. All publications returned by the searches were initially included. Exclusion criteria included irrelevance, no reporting of reject rate, no access to the article, and not original article. The total number of images and the number of rejects were recorded for each type of radiographic images. Factors and commonest errors associated with the rejects were recorded. Twenty-six original articles were identified and reviewed. The average reject rate was 11.25% for bitewings, 16.38% for periapicals, 4.10% for panoramics, 6.08% for lateral cephalography, and 2.77% for CBCT. Positioning error and patient movement were two common reasons for the rejects. The average reject rates computed from data pooled across studies should form the reference values for quality assurance programs to follow. Future reject analysis studies should report more radiographic parameters such as type of collimation for intra-oral radiography and patient posture for CBCT.

Effects of scanning parameters reduction in dental radiographs on image quality and diagnostic performance: A randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of reducing scanning parameters of digital dental panoramic tomogram (DPT) and lateral cephalometric (LC) radiographs on quality and diagnostic performance of the images.

DESIGN

Single-centre prospective two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Orthodontic Clinic, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor, Malaysia.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult orthodontic patients aged 18-35 years, indicated for DPT and LC, who were fit and healthy with a body mass index of 18.5-25.0, not contraindicated to radiographic examination, not pregnant, and did not have a history of facial or skeletal abnormalities or bone diseases were included.

METHODS

Thirty-eight adult orthodontic patients were randomised into control and intervention groups. DPT and LC radiographs in the control group were obtained using standard scanning parameters as prescribed by the manufacturer using Orthopantomograph® OP300 by Instrumentarium. Scanning parameters in the intervention group were reduced by 60% for DPT (60 kV, 3.2 mA) and 30% for LC (85 kV, 8 mA). A five-point rating scale was used for the assessment of image quality. Images were evaluated for diagnostic performance by detection of anatomical landmarks. Mann-Whitney test was performed to compare the quality and diagnostic performance of the images and the observer agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

For image quality, the control group produced slightly lower median scores (DPT 2.0, LC 2.0) compared to the intervention group (DPT 2.0, LC 3.0). For diagnostic performance, both groups showed similar median scores (DPT 21.0, LC 32.0). The differences between control and intervention groups for both modalities were not statistically significant. The average scores for intra-observer agreement were excellent (ICC 0.917) and inter-observer agreement was good (ICC 0.822).

CONCLUSION

Minimising radiation exposure by reducing scanning parameters on digital DPT by 60% and LC by 30% on Intsrumentarium 300 OP did not affect the quality and diagnostic performance of the images. Thus, scanning parameters on digital DPT and LC should be reduced when taking radiographs.