Comparison of image quality between intraoral radiographic images using wall-mounted and handheld dental X-ray units.
Objective: To compare the quality of intraoral radiographic images of two types of dental detectors using wall-mounted and handheld dental X-ray units. Methods: Six intraoral dental radiographic images of a Dental Digital Quality Assurance radiographic phantom (Dental Imaging Consultants LLC, San An...
| Publicado en: | Oral Radiology Vol. 42; no. 1; pp. 51 - 60 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
| Formato: | diagnostic images research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Jan2026
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=190750543&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 190750543 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 09116028 1P9 jtl: Oral Radiology issn: 09116028 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jan2026 vid: 42 iid: 1 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature place: New York, New York artinfo: ui: 190750543 186127325 190750543 190750543 10.1007/s11282-025-00837-y 190750543 ppf: 51 ppct: 9 formats: tig: atl: Comparison of image quality between intraoral radiographic images using wall-mounted and handheld dental X-ray units. aug: au: Ruiz, Débora Costa de Oliveira-Santos, Christiano Réa, Marcela Tarosso Silva, Thaisa Pinheiro Santaella, Gustavo Machado Scarfe, William C. Freitas, Deborah Queiroz affil: https://ror.org/04wffgt70 Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Av. Limeira, 901, Areião, 13414-903, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil sug: subj: Radiographic Image Enhancement Evaluation Radiography, Dental, Digital Portable Equipment Equipment Design Phantoms, Imaging Human Funding Source In Vitro Studies Computers, Hand-Held Radiologists Software Descriptive Research Two-Way Analysis of Variance Post Hoc Analysis Comparative Studies Noise Descriptive Statistics Data Analysis Software X-Rays Quality Assurance ab: Objective: To compare the quality of intraoral radiographic images of two types of dental detectors using wall-mounted and handheld dental X-ray units. Methods: Six intraoral dental radiographic images of a Dental Digital Quality Assurance radiographic phantom (Dental Imaging Consultants LLC, San Antonio, TX) were acquired with two types of dental receptors: photostimulable phosphor (PSP) receptor (CS 7600 digital system, Carestream Dental, Rochester, New York, United States) under two conditions, filtered and unfiltered; and a complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) sensor (RGV 6200, Carestream Dental, Rochester, New York, United States) using handheld (Nomad Pro 2; Kavo Kerr, Biberach, Germany) and wall-mounted (Midmark Preva DC Intraoral X-ray, Midmark Corporation, Illinois, United States) dental X-ray units. Spatial and contrast resolutions and percentage of radiographic contrast were evaluated. Then, radiographic images of an acrylic block were obtained under the same conditions and brightness, noise, and uniformity were assessed. Values were compared between the devices and the digital systems with Analysis of Variance (P < 0.05). Results: There were no differences in spatial and contrast resolutions between dental X-ray units and detectors. Handheld dental X-ray units provide significantly higher radiographic contrast (P < 0.001) and lower brightness, noise, and uniformity (P < 0.001) regardless of the digital system used. Conclusions: Compared to a wall-mounted dental X-ray unit, the handheld device provides higher radiographic contrast and lower brightness, noise, and uniformity regardless of the digital system used. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: diagnostic images research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|