Comparison between the commonly used radiographic techniques for intra oral imaging in dentistry-A questionnaire study

  • Authors

    • Ramesh Tatapudi PROFESSOR
    • Swathi Myla POST GRADUATE
    • Upendra Gurugubelli senior lecturer
    • Jyothirmai Koneru reader
    • Meenakshi K senior lecturer
    • Sravani Bandaru POST GRADUATE
    • Reshmi Thumula POST GRADUATE
  • BDS Students, Bisecting-Angle Technique, Exposure Parameters, Image Accuracy, Operator and Patient Comfort, Paralleling Tech-niques, Post Graduate Students, Private Practioners, and Technical Parameters.
  • Aim:-To compare the opinion regarding usage of bisecting-angle technique and the paralleling techniques among BDS students, post graduate students, private practitioners in and around Bhimavaram town for intra oral imaging in dentistry.
    Materials and methods: A detailed questionnaire composed of questions regarding technical parameters, exposure parameters, operator and patient comfort and image accuracy in diagnosis. Details of the study were explained to the participants preferred option to be marked according to the question mentioned in the questionnaire. Total 500 individuals participated in the present study, with 100 individuals in each group. Data was collected and entered in Microsoft Excel (2010) and statistically analysed using SPSS 20. Chi-square test was used to evaluate differences in the responses with P-value ≤ 0.05 were considered significant.
    Results: Results showed that in technical parameters most of the people opted for bisecting angle technique with p value≤ 0.05 and found as significant. In aspect of exposure parameters, results are in favour of paralleling technique and p value is ≤ 0.05. In aspect of the operator and patient comfort there is an equal opinion most of them opted for bisecting angle technique and paralleling technique p value is significant. In aspect of image accuracy p value is significant for paralleling technique.
    Conclusion: Great work should have to be done to alleviate the quality of radiographs and the understanding and perspective of dental graduates regarding dental and maxillo-facial radiology. The results of present study revealed though there is knowledge about the techniques, but lack of application decreases their ability to get more accurate diagnostic radiograph. Paralleling technique being the most accurate in image accuracy should be emphasized to practice and needed to be modified in conditions where it is not feasible to deal with.

  • References

    1. [1] Bramanet CM, Berbert A (1974) A critical evaluation of some methods of determining tooth length. Journal of Oral Surgery, 37: 463. (74)90122-4
      [2] Ludlow JB, Mol A. Digital imaging. In: White SC, Pharoah MJ (eds). (2004) Oral radiology: Principles and interpretation (6th ed). St.Louis: Mosby. 109-35.
      [3] Sudhakar S (2014) Utility of Extra-Oral Aiming Device in Imaging Periapical Regions of Posterior Teeth .Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 8: 51-55.
      [4] Jamdade AS (2014) Modified bisecting angle technique in eliminating zygomatic superimposition over apices of maxillary molars. Indian Journal of Dental Research, 25:521-6.
      [5] Whaites E (2002) Essentials of Dental Radiography and Radiology. 3rd ed. Edinburgh,Churchill Livingstone, 89‑110.
      [6] Bragger U (2005) Radiographic parameters: biological significance and clinical use. Journal of Periodontalogy, 39:73–90.
      [7] Langland OF, Langlais RP, Preece JW (2002) Principles of dental imaging. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, 91-97.
      [8] John PR (1999) Essentials of Dental Radiology 1st Ed. New Delhi: Jaypee brothers, 75-81.
      [9] Forsberg J, Halse A (1997) Periapical radiolucencies as evaluated by bisecting-angle and paralleling radiographic techniques. International journal of endodontic, 30:115-23.
      [10] Ibrahim (2013) Comparison of paralleling and bisecting angle techniques in endodontic working length radiography .Pakistan Oral & Dental Journal, 33(1).
      [11] Forsberg J (1987). Estimation of the root filling length with the paralleling and bisecting-angle techniques performed by undergraduate students. International Endodontic Journal, 20:282-286.
      [12] Rushton V.E, Homer K (1994) A comparative study of radiographic quality with five periapical techniques in general dental practice. DentomaxillofacialRadiology, 23:37-45.
      [13] Gound GT, Dubois L, Biggs SG (1994) Factors that affect rate of retakes for endodontic treatment radiographs. Journal of Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology, 77: 514-8.
      [14] Raoof, M., Heidaripour, M., Shahravan, A., Haghani, J., Afkham, A., Razifar, M., &Mohammadizadeh, S (2014). General Dental Practitioners’ Concept towards Using Radiography and Apex-Locators in Endodontics. Iranian Endodontic Journal, 9(4): 277–282.
      [15] Saunders WP, Chesnutt IG, Saunders EM (1999) Factors influencing the diagnosis and management of the teeth with pulpal and periradicular disease by general dental practitioners. British Dental Journal, 548–54.
      [16] A c Chandler NP, Koshy S (2002) Radiographic practices of dentists undertaking endodontics in New Zealand. Journal of Dento maxillofacial Radiology, 31: 317–21.
      [17] Kazzi (2007) A comparative study of three periapical radiographic techniques for endodontic working length estimation. International Endodontic Journal, 40: 526–531.
      [18] JKM Aps (2010) Flemish general dental practitioner’s knowledge of dental Radiology. DentomaxillofacialRadiology, 39(2):113–118.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Tatapudi, R., Myla, S., Gurugubelli, U., Koneru, J., K, M., Bandaru, S., & Thumula, R. (2017). Comparison between the commonly used radiographic techniques for intra oral imaging in dentistry-A questionnaire study. International Journal of Dental Research, 5(2), 157-162.