DMFR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Similar articles in PubMed
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 Syriopoulos, K.
Right arrow Articles by Tsiklakis, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Syriopoulos, K.
Right arrow Articles by Tsiklakis, K.

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Vol 27, Issue 6 321-328, Copyright © 1998 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Mail survey of dental radiographic techniques and radiation doses in Greece

K. Syriopoulos, X. L. Velders, P. F. van der Stelt, F. C. van Ginkel and K. Tsiklakis
Department of Oral Radiology, Academic Centre for Dentistry, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the entrance dose from periapical radiography in Greece and to determine the relative influence of factors affecting it. METHODS: Special packs, containing a questionnaire, a film (X-Omat MA 18 x 22.4 cm, Ready Pack, Kodak-Pathe, Paris, France) with an attached aluminium stepwedge and a pre-exposed Ektaspeed Plus (Kodak) film, were mailed to 550 randomly selected dental practitioners. The results were tested statistically using an Analysis of Variance (level P < 0.05). RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-four packs were returned: 311 were complete but in 53 the pre-exposed film had not been developed. The average HVL was 1.4 mm Al 51% of the units had pointed cones and 34% a beam diameter larger than 6 cm. 54% of the dentists used E-speed films. Eighty per cent of the films were inadequately processed. For the total group the average entrance dose was 6.9 mGy (range 0.6-36 mGy), and 6.3 mGy (range 0.6-35 mGy) for the completed packs (n = 311). The radiation dose for the completed packs was significantly influenced by HVL, film speed, length of cone and standard of processing. CONCLUSIONS: HVL, film speed, length of cone and standards of processing influence the entrance dose. Not all of the available measures for reducing radiation dose are commonly practised in Greece. Continuing education programs can help to improve radiation safety for dental patients.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
M Alcaraz, C Navarro, V Vicente, and M Canteras
Dose reduction of intraoral dental radiography in Spain.
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., July 1, 2006; 35(4): 295 - 298.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
F. Gijbels, D. Debaveye, M. Vanderstappen, and R. Jacobs
Digital radiographic equipment in the Belgian dental office
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 309 - 312.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
D Ilguy, M Ilguy, S Dincer, and G Bayirli
Survey of dental radiological practice in Turkey
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., July 1, 2005; 34(4): 222 - 227.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 1998 by the British Institute of Radiology.