An evaluation of the diagnostic yield from bitewing radiographs of small approximal and occlusal carious lesions in a low prevalence sample in vitro using different film types and speeds

British Dental Journal

Volumn 182, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 51-58

  Ricketts, D N J ^a   Whaites, E J ^a   Kidd, E A M ^a   Brown, J E ^a   Wilson, R F ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL CARIES; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY; X RAY FILM;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DENTAL CARIES; HUMANS; RADIOGRAPHY, BITEWING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; X-RAY FILM;

EID: 0031585749     PISSN: 00070610     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4809298     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Silha R E. The new Kodak Ektaspeed dental radiograph film. Dental Radiography Photography 1981; 54: 3-35.
2. Guidelines on radiology standards in primary dental care. National Radiological Protection Board and Royal College of Radiologists 1994; 5 No3.
3. Council on Dental Materials, Instruments and Equipment: Recommendations in radiographic practices: an update, 1988. J Am Dent Assoc 1989; 118: 115-117.
4. Nakfoor C A, Brooks S L. Compliance of Michigan dentists with radiographic safety recommendations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1992; 73: 510-513.
5. Kaugars G E, Broga D W, Collett W K. Dental radiologic survey of Virginia and Florida. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1985; 60: 225-229.
6. Goren A D, Sciubba J J, Friedman R, Malamud H. Survey of radiologic practices among dental practitioners. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1989; 67: 464-468.
7. Svenson B, Lindvall A M, Gröndahl H G. A comparison of a new dental radiograph film, Agfa Gevaert Dentus M4, with Kodak Ektaspeed and Ultraspeed dental radiograph films. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1993; 22: 7-12.
8. Whaites E. Essentials of dental radiography and radiology. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1992.
9. Kogan S L, Stephens R G, Reid J A, Donner A. Ektaspeed and a screen/film system compared with Ultraspeed in the interpretation of early proximal caries. J Can Dent Assoc 1984; 50: 397-401.
10. Arnold L V. The radiographic detection of initial carious lesions on the proximal surfaces of teeth Part 1. The influence of exposure conditions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1987; 64: 221-231.
11. Brettle D S, Workman A, Cowen A R, Carmichael F A. Quantification of digital dental system performance. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1995; 24: 83-84.
12. Diehl R, Gratt B M, Gould R G. Radiographic quality control measurements comparing D-speed film, E-speed film, and xeroradiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1986; 61: 635-640.
13. Kaffe I, Littner M M, Kuspet M E. Densitometric evaluation of intraoral radiograph films: Ektaspeed versus Ultraspeed. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1984; 57: 338-342.
14. Thunthy K H, Weinberg R. Sensitometric comparison of dental films of groups D and E. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1982; 54: 250-252.
15. Svenson B, Gröndahl H G, Petersson A, Olving A. Accuracy of radiographic caries diagnosis at different kilovoltages and two film speeds. Swed Dent J 1985; 9: 37-43.
16. Waggoner W F, Ashton J J. Comparison of Kodak D-speed and E-speed radiograph film in detection of proximal caries. J Dent Child 1988; 55: 459-462.
17. Svenson B, Petersson A. Influence of different developing solutions and developing times on radiographic caries diagnosis. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1990; 19: 157-160.
18. Russell M, Pitts N B. Radiovisiographic diagnosis of dental caries: initial comparison of basic mode videoprints with bitewing radiography. Caries Res 1993; 27: 65-70.
19. Verdonschot E H, Wenzel A, Bronkhorst E M. Assessment of diagnostic accuracy in caries detection: an analysis of two methods. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1993; 21: 203-308.
20. Wenzel A, Fejerskov O, Kidd E, Joyston-Bechal S, Groeneveld A. Depth of occlusal caries assessed clinically, by conventional film radiographs, and by digitized, processed radiographs. Cartes Res 1990; 24: 327-333.
21. Kay E J. Factors affecting dental restorative treatment decisions. PhD Thesis, 1991: University of Glasgow.
22. Gwinnett A J. A comparison of proximal carious lesions as seen by clinical radiography, contact microradiographs and light microscopy. J Am Dent Assoc 1971; 83: 1078-1080.
23. Purdell-Lewis D J, Groeneveld A, Pot T J, Kwant G W. A comparison of visual, radiographical and microradiographical appearance. Neth Dent J 1974; Suppl. 10, 81: 6-15.
24. Ricketts D N J, Kidd E A M, Smith B G N, Wilson R F. Clinical and radiographic diagnosis of occlusal caries: a study in vitro. J Oral Rehabil 1995; 22: 15-20.