Earticle

Carried out an experiment for quantitative evaluation about intraoral sensor among oral dental imaging equipments in PACS environment. For evaluation, testing environment & evaluation criteria are established that refer to the ‘IEC 62220-1-2’ and experimented with set up the standard radiation penetration that correspond with RQA-3(IEC 61267). Results of experiments using the image J, derived the ESF(edge spread function), LSF (line spread function) and calculated the MTF(modulation transfer function) finally. As a result, the MTF that 0.1, 0.2sec are 10% about 10 lp/mm and 0.32 sec is the 10% about 9 lp/mm in level represents the value of the MTF. Change of scan condition in dental environmental, according to the MTF value taken note that no changes can be seen enough. However, the dimensions of each other size 1(1200×1600), size 2(1440×1920) intraoral sensors for 3 lp/mm, respectively 40%, 90% of the note might have been the difference between the value of MTF, in accordance with standard sensors might note differences could be observed.

Purpose: This study was performed to quantify the repeat rate of imaging acquisitions based on different clinical examinations, and to assess the prevalence of error types in intraoral bitewing and periapical imaging using a digital complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor(CMOS) intraoral sensor. Materials and Methods: A total of 8,030 intraoral images were retrospectively collected from 3 groups of undergraduate clinical dental students. The type of examination, stage of the procedure, and reasons for repetition were analysed and recorded. The repeat rate was calculated as the total number of repeated images divided by the total number of examinations. The weighted Cohen's kappa for inter- and intra-observer agreement was used after calibration and prior to image analysis. Results: The overall repeat rate on intraoral periapical images was 34.4%. A total of 1,978 repeated periapical images were from endodontic assessment, which included working length estimation (WLE), trial gutta-percha (tGP), obturation, and removal of gutta-percha (rGP). In the endodontic imaging, the highest repeat rate was from WLE (51.9%) followed by tGP (48.5%), obturation (42.2%), and rGP (35.6%). In bitewing images, the repeat rate was 15.1% and poor angulation was identified as the most common cause of error. A substantial level of intra- and inter-observer agreement was achieved. Conclusion: The repeat rates in this study were relatively high, especially for certain clinical procedures, warranting training in optimization techniques and radiation protection. Repeat analysis should be performed from time to time to enhance quality assurance and hence deliver high-quality health services to patients