DMFR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Conover, G. L.
Right arrow Articles by Anthony, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Conover, G. L.
Right arrow Articles by Anthony, D.

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Vol 24, Issue 3 169-172, Copyright © 1995 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

A comparison of six intra-oral X-ray films

G. L. Conover, C. F. Hildebolt and D. Anthony
School of Dental Medicine, Southern Illinois University, Alton, IL, USA.

OBJECTIVES: To compare objectively and subjectively national-brand dental X-ray films with widely available and less costly brands. METHODS: A range of dental films, including the recently released Kodak Ektaspeed Plus, was purchased from mail-order suppliers at the lowest published price. Objective measurements (film speed, contrast, fog levels, costs, physical characteristics) and subjective evaluations (ease of use, film graininess, overall appearance) were made. RESULTS: Private-label films were obtained at less cost than those of major vendors. Not all film speeds, sizes and wrapping materials were available from individual manufacturers. Objective measures and subjective appraisals showed that Ektaspeed Plus was the fastest film and had good contrast with the clinically useful density ranges. Agfa Dentus was the next fastest film, but it had rather low contrast and was grainier than the other films. The non-proprietary brands were difficult to open with primary glove barriers, making effective infection control practices arduous. All films were relatively stable over a 16-week period regardless of storage location.CONCLUSIONS: The major manufacturers offered more choices of film sizes and speeds than did private label suppliers. The films from the major manufacturers, although more expensive, were more conducive to effective infection control practices. Ektaspeed Plus had a performance comparable with or better than the other available films. Based on this preliminary study, it is recommended that this new film is considered as an alternative to D-speed films.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
G Kaeppler, K Dietz, and S Reinert
The effect of dose reduction on the detection of anatomical structures on panoramic radiographs.
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., July 1, 2006; 35(4): 271 - 277.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 1995 by the British Institute of Radiology.