A comparison between bitewing radiographs taken with rectangular and circular collimators in UK military dental practices: A retrospective study

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 102-109

  Parrott, L A ^a   Ng, S Y ^b  

^a Defence Dental Services   (United Kingdom)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bitewing radiography; Circular collimation; Cone cut; Rectangular collimation

Indexed keywords

EID: 78751471122     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/86968802     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Recommendations on radiographic procedures technical report No 8 (Revision) Int Dent J 1989; 39: 147-148.
2. European guidelines on radiation protection in dental radiology. The safe use of radiographs in dental practice. Issue No 126. Office of Official Publications of the European Communities 2004.
3. Araki K, Kanda S. Radiological characteristics of lead foils in dental packets: analysis of components and shielding effect. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1992; 21: 21-25.
4. Mauriello SM, Overman VP, Jansen L. Current techniques and principles in dental radiology: part II. J Pract Hyg 2002; Nov/Dec 22-25.
5. Langland OE, Langlais RP, Preece JW. Principles of dental imaging (2nd edn). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2002 Philadelphia, PA.
6. Geist JR, Katz JO. Radiation dose-reduction techniques in North American dental schools. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2002; 93: 496-505.
7. Thornley PH, Stewardson DA, Rout PG, Burke FJ. Rectangular collimation and radiographic efficacy in eight general dental practices in the West Midlands. Prim Dent Care 2004; 11: 81-86.
8. Bristow RG, Wood RE, Clark GM. Thyroid dose distribution in dental radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1989; 68: 482-487.
9. Horner K, Hirschmann PN. Dose reduction in dental radiography. J Dent 1990; 18: 171-84.
10. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, White SC. Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection recommendations regarding dose calculations. J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139: 1237-1243.
11. Nixon PP, Thorogood J, Holloway J, Smith NJ. An audit of film reject and repeat rates in a department of dental radiology. Br J Radiol 1995; 68: 1304-1307.
12. Janhom A, van Ginkel FC, van Amerongen JP, van der Stelt PF. Scanning resolution and the detection of approximal caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001; 30: 166-171.
13. Attaelmanan A, Borg E, Grondahl HG. Digitisation and display of intra-oral films. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002; 29: 97-102.
14. Cederberg RA, Frederiksen NL, Benson BW, Sokolowski TW. Effect of the geometry of the intraoral position-indicating device on effective dose. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1997; 84: 101-109.
15. Friedlander LT, Love RM, Chandler NP. A comparison of phosphor plate digital images with conventional radiographs for the perceived clarity of fine endodontic files and periapical lesions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2002; 93: 321-327.
16. Haak R, Wicht MJ, Nowak G, Hellmich M. Influence of displayed image size on radiographic detection of approximal caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003; 32: 242-246.
17. Patel JR. Intraoral radiographic errors. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1979; 48: 479-483.
18. Horton PS, Sippy FH, Nelson JF, Kohout FJ, Kienzle GC. A comparison of rectangular and cylindrical collimation for intraoral radiographs. J Dent Educ 1983; 47: 771-773.
19. Sewerin I, Andersen HE, Andersen V, Remvig P. Frequency and severity of cone-cuttings in intra-oral radiography using circular and rectangular collimation. Tandlaegebladet 1985; 89: 633-637.
20. Parks ET. Errors generated with the use of rectangular collimation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991; 71: 509-513.
21. Mupparapu M, Jariwala S, Singer SR, Kim IH, Janal M. Comparison of re-exposure rates of intraoral radiographs between dental student and trained dental assistants in an oral and maxillofacial radiology clinic. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007; 36: 224-228.
22. Potter B, Shrout MK, Harrell JC. Reproducibility of beam alignment using different bite-wing radiographic techniques. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 79: 532-535.
23. Kircos LT, Angin LL, Lorton L. Order of magnitude dose reduction in intraoral radiography J Am Dent Assoc 1987; 114: 344-347.
24. Farman AG, Parks ET. Radiation safety and quality assurance in US dental hygiene programmes, 1990. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1991; 20: 152-154.
25. Tugnait A, Clerehugh V, Hirschmann PN. Radiographic equipment and techniques used in general dental practice: a survey of general dental practitioners in England and Wales. J Den 2003; 31: 197-203.
26. Stavrianou K, Pappous G, Pallikarakis N. A Quality assurance programme in dental radiographic units in western Greece. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2005; 99: 622-627.
27. Janhom A, van der Stelt PF, van Ginkel FC, Geraets WGM. Effect of noise on the compressibility and diagnostic accuracy for caries detection of digital bitewing radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 6-12.
28. Janhom A, van der Stelt PF, van Ginkel FC. Interaction between noise and file compression and its effect on the recognition of caries in digital imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2000; 29: 20-27.
29. Fuhrmann AW. Current practice in conventional and digital intraoral radiography: problems and solutions. Int J Comput Dent 2006; 9: 61-68.