Cargando…

Image quality of a portable X-ray device (Nomad Pro 2) compared to a wall-mounted device in intraoral radiography

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether a handheld (HH) X-ray device (Nomad Pro 2) is capable of producing equivalent or even superior X-ray image quality in comparison to a wall-mounted (WM) dental X-ray unit (Heliodent Plus) on the basis of objectifiable image quality parameters...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nitschke, Julia, Schorn, Lara, Holtmann, Henrik, Zeller, Uwe, Handschel, Jörg, Sonntag, David, Lommen, Julian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Singapore 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7985112/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32232719
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11282-020-00434-1
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether a handheld (HH) X-ray device (Nomad Pro 2) is capable of producing equivalent or even superior X-ray image quality in comparison to a wall-mounted (WM) dental X-ray unit (Heliodent Plus) on the basis of objectifiable image quality parameters. METHODS: Anatomical, radiological and biological dental X-ray image quality parameters of a handheld dental X-ray device (Nomad Pro 2, Kavo Kerr, Biberach, Germany) were compared to a standard wall-mounted dental X-ray unit (Heliodent Plus, Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim, Germany) using a maxillofacial phantom. In addition, the effect of different operators (dentists, dental students, dental assistants) on the dental X-ray image quality was measured. RESULTS: HH and WM devices showed comparable image quality for anterior teeth, premolars, molars and bitewing images. During the two-month investigational period, the radiation exposure level for the operator of the Nomad Pro 2 was 0.1 mSv for 203 images. Dentists as the highest trained personnel enrolled in the study achieved better image quality with the Nomad Pro 2 as compared to dental students and dental assistants, especially in the molar region. CONCLUSIONS: A HH device delivers a comparable image quality to a WM device. In addition, there seem to be short learning curves with regard to image acquisition when using a handheld device, which is further minimised by the previous training of the operating personnel. HH dental X-ray devices, such as the Nomad Pro 2 are a promising adjunct for dental radiology in cases where WM units are of limited practicability.