Imaging Sci Dent.  2012 Sep;42(3):183-190. 10.5624/isd.2012.42.3.183.

Clinical image quality evaluation for panoramic radiography in Korean dental clinics

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
  • 2Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, BK21 Craniomaxillofacial Life Science, and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea. raylee@snu.ac.kr
  • 3Department of Preventive and Public Health Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to investigate the level of clinical image quality of panoramic radiographs and to analyze the parameters that influence the overall image quality.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Korean dental clinics were asked to provide three randomly selected panoramic radiographs. An oral and maxillofacial radiology specialist evaluated those images using our self-developed Clinical Image Quality Evaluation Chart. Three evaluators classified the overall image quality of the panoramic radiographs and evaluated the causes of imaging errors.
RESULTS
A total of 297 panoramic radiographs were collected from 99 dental hospitals and clinics. The mean of the scores according to the Clinical Image Quality Evaluation Chart was 79.9. In the classification of the overall image quality, 17 images were deemed 'optimal for obtaining diagnostic information,' 153 were 'adequate for diagnosis,' 109 were 'poor but diagnosable,' and nine were 'unrecognizable and too poor for diagnosis'. The results of the analysis of the causes of the errors in all the images are as follows: 139 errors in the positioning, 135 in the processing, 50 from the radiographic unit, and 13 due to anatomic abnormality.
CONCLUSION
Panoramic radiographs taken at local dental clinics generally have a normal or higher-level image quality. Principal factors affecting image quality were positioning of the patient and image density, sharpness, and contrast. Therefore, when images are taken, the patient position should be adjusted with great care. Also, standardizing objective criteria of image density, sharpness, and contrast is required to evaluate image quality effectively.

Keyword

Quality Control; Radiography, Panoramic; Image Quality Enhancement, Quality Assurance

MeSH Terms

Dental Clinics
Humans
Quality Control
Radiography, Panoramic
Specialization

Figure

  • Fig. 1 An example of the image from 'optimal for obtaining diagnosis information' group.

  • Fig. 2 An example of the image from 'adequate for diagnosis' group.

  • Fig. 3 An example of the image from 'poor, but diagnosable' group.

  • Fig. 4 An example of the images from 'unrecognizable, too poor for diagnosis' group.

  • Fig. 5 An example of the high score image of the 'poor, but diagnosable' image quality group.

  • Fig. 6 The highest scored image of the 'poor, but diagnosable' image quality group.


Cited by  7 articles

Evaluation of factors influencing the success rate of orthodontic microimplants using panoramic radiographs
Jae Hyun Park, Jong-Moon Chae, R. Curtis Bay, Mi-Jung Kim, Keun-Young Lee, Na-Young Chang
Korean J Orthod. 2018;48(1):30-38.    doi: 10.4041/kjod.2018.48.1.30.

Positioning errors and quality assessment in panoramic radiography
Manu Dhillon, Srinivasa M Raju, Sankalp Verma, Divya Tomar, Raviprakash S Mohan, Manisha Lakhanpal, Bhuvana Krishnamoorthy
Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42(4):207-212.    doi: 10.5624/isd.2012.42.4.207.

Evaluation of the accuracy of linear and angular measurements on panoramic radiographs taken at different positions
Sima Nikneshan, Mohamad Sharafi, Naghmeh Emadi
Imaging Sci Dent. 2013;43(3):191-196.    doi: 10.5624/isd.2013.43.3.191.

Common positioning errors in panoramic radiography: A review
Rafael Henrique Nunes Rondon, Yamba Carla Lara Pereira, Glauce Crivelaro do Nascimento
Imaging Sci Dent. 2014;44(1):1-6.    doi: 10.5624/isd.2014.44.1.1.

Comparison of the reproducibility of panoramic radiographs between dentulous and edentulous patients
Jong-Woong Park, Kyung-Hoe Huh, Won-Jin Yi, Min-Suk Heo, Sam-Sun Lee, Soon-Chul Choi
Imaging Sci Dent. 2014;44(2):95-102.    doi: 10.5624/isd.2014.44.2.95.

Contrast reference values in panoramic radiographic images using an arch-form phantom stand
Jae-Myung Shin, Chena Lee, Jo-Eun Kim, Kyung-Hoe Huh, Won-Jin Yi, Min-Suk Heo, Soon-Chul Choi, Sam-Sun Lee
Imaging Sci Dent. 2016;46(3):203-210.    doi: 10.5624/isd.2016.46.3.203.

Image quality assessment of pre-processed and post-processed digital panoramic radiographs in paediatric patients with mixed dentition
Isti Rahayu Suryani, Natalia Salvo Villegas, Sohaib Shujaat, Annelore De Grauwe, Azhari Azhari, Suhardjo Sitam, Reinhilde Jacobs
Imaging Sci Dent. 2018;48(4):261-268.    doi: 10.5624/isd.2018.48.4.261.


Reference

1. American Dental Association. United States Department of Health and Human Services. The selection of patients for dental radiographic examinations. Revised 2004. 2004. Chicago: American Dental Association.
2. Parsons DM, Kim Y, Haynor DR. Quality control of cathoderay tube monitors for medical imaging using a simple photometer. J Digit Imaging. 1995. 8:10–20.
Article
3. National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements. NCRP report No. 145 - Radiation protection in dentistry. 2003. Bethesda: NCRP.
4. European Commision [Internet]. Radiation protection 136: European guidelines on radioation protection in dental radiology. cited June 10. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/radiation_protection/publications_en.htm.
5. Enforcement regulations of the installation and operation of special medical equipments. Enforcement regulation No.65 of Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2003.
6. Kim EK. Report No. 09142Radiology510. Development of diagnostic reference level in dental x-ray examination in Korea. Final report. 2009. 11. Seoul: Korea Food & Drug Adnimistration.
7. Choi JI, Na DG, Kim HH, Shin YM, Ahn KJ, Lee JY. Quality control of medical imaging. J Korean Radiol Soc. 2004. 50:317–331.
Article
8. Lee SH, Choe YH, Chung SY, Kim MH, Kim EK, Oh KK, et al. Establishment of quality assessment standard for mammographic equipments: evaluation of phantom and clinical images. J Korean Radiol Soc. 2005. 53:117–127.
Article
9. White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral Radiology. Principles and Interpretation. 2009. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book Inc;175–190.
10. Kim HJ. Report No. 10171Radiology457. A study on guidance for medical radiation safety. Final report. 2010. 12. Korea Food & Drug Adnimistration.
11. Choi DH. A study of clinical evaluation reference and imaging standardization for panoramic imaging [dissertation]. 2012. Seoul: Seoul National University.
Full Text Links
  • ISD
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr