Dentists’ use of digital radiographic techniques: Part II – extraoral radiography: a questionnaire study of Swedish dentists

References

• Mouyen F, Benz C, Sonnabend E, et al. Presentation and physical evaluation of RadioVisioGraphy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1989;68:238–242.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gijbels F, Debaveye D, Vanderstappen M, et al. Digital radiographic equipment in the Belgian dental office. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;117:309–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svenson B, Stahlnacke K, Karlsson R, et al. Dentists' use of digital radiographic techniques: part I - intraoral X-ray: a questionnaire study of Swedish dentists. Acta Odontol Scand. 2018;76:111–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hol C, Hellen-Halme K, Torgersen G, et al. How do dentists use CBCT in dental clinics? A Norwegian nationwide survey. Acta Odontol Scand. 2015;73:195–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sedentexct. Radiation protection: cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology. Evidence Based Guidlines. 2011;1–139.
   Google Scholar
• De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen GR. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38:609–625.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strindberg JE, Hol C, Torgersen G, et al. Comparison of Swedish and Norwegian use of cone-beam computed tomography: a questionnaire study. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2015;6:e2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C, et al. Effective dose of dental CBCT-a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang X, Jacobs R, Hassan B, et al. A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT) Part I. On Subjective Image Quality. Eur J Radiol. 2010;75:265–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loubele M, Bogaerts R, Van Dijck E, et al. Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol. 2009;71:461–468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nemtoi A, Czink C, Haba D, et al. Cone beam CT: a current overview of devices. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. Radiation protection N° 172. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology: evidence-based guidelines. Luxembourg: European Commission. Directorate-General for Energy, Directorate D — Nuclear Energy, Unit D4 — Radiation Protection; 2012. p. 154.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission Radiation Protection. European guidelines on radiation protection in dental radiology. The safe use of radiographs in dental practice. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities Luxembourg. N 136. Manchester, UK; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. Strålsäkerhetsmyndighetens föreskrifter om röntgendiagnostik. SSMFS 2008:31. Stockholm; 2008. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Dölekoğlu S, Fişekçioğlu E, İlgüy M, et al. The usage of digital radiography and cone beam computed tomography among Turkish dentists. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40:379–384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svenson B, Soderfeldt B, Grondahl H. Knowledge of oral radiology among Swedish dentists. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1997;26:219–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aps JK. Flemish general dental practitioners' knowledge of dental radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39:113–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rushton VE, Horner K, Worthington HV. Aspects of panoramic radiography in general dental practice. Br Dent J. 1999;186:342–344.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenzel A, Moystad A. Decision criteria and characteristics of Norwegian general dental practitioners selecting digital radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2001;30:197–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Dyck J, Willemen E, Helsen L, Jacobs R, Bottenberg P, Jacquet W. The Belgian dentist and radiology. In: Aps, J. K.M, et al, editors. The Dental Year, 2017. Bohn Stafleu of Loghum, Springer Media: Houten, The Netherlands; 2017. Dutch, 235–45.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Dental Association. Nordic Dentistry in Numbers. http://www.tandlakarforbundet.se. Stockholm. Swedish Dental Association, ed; 2015. p. 1-15.
   Google Scholar
• Privattandläkarna. Tandvården i siffror 2018. https://ptl.se/tandvarden-i-siffror-2/. 2018. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Stenstrom B, Karlsson L. Collective doses to the Swedish population from panoramic radiography and lateral cephalography. Swed Dent J. 1988;12:161–170.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• The Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency TLV. Dental care benefits scheme. Registry data. https://www.tlv.se/in-english.html. Stockholm; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Tugnait A, Clerehugh V, Hirschmann PN. Radiographic equipment and techniques used in general dental practice: a survey of general dental practitioners in England and Wales. J Dent. 2003;31:197–203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anissi HD, Geibel MA. Intraoral radiology in general dental practices - a comparison of digital and film-based X-ray systems with regard to radiation protection and dose reduction. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2014;186:762–767.
   Google Scholar
• Mauthe PW, Eaton KA. An investigation into dental digital radiography in dental practices in West Kent following the introduction of the 2006 NHS General Dental Services contract. Prim Dent Care. 2011;18:73–81.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Metsala E, Henner A, Ekholm M. Quality assurance in digital dental imaging: a systematic review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2014;72:362–371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogdanic W, McGinty J. Radiation worries for children in dentists’ chairs. New York Times [Internet] 2010 November 23. https://wwwnytimescom/2010/11/23/us/23scanhtml.
   Google Scholar
• Torgersen GR, Hol C, Moystad A, et al. A phantom for simplified image quality control of dental cone beam computed tomography units. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2014;118:603–611.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludlow JB. A manufacturer's role in reducing the dose of cone beam computed tomography examinations: effect of beam filtration. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40:115–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies C, Grange S, Trevor M. Radiation protection practices and related continuing professional education in dental radiography: a survey of practitioners in the North-east of England. Radiography. 2005;11:255–261. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817405001173.
   Google Scholar
• Choi JW. Assessment of panoramic radiography as a national oral examination tool: review of the literature. Imaging Sci Dent. 2011;41:1–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dhillon M, Raju SM, Verma S, et al. Positioning errors and quality assessment in panoramic radiography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42:207–212.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Granlund CM, Lith A, Molander B, et al. Frequency of errors and pathology in panoramic images of young orthodontic patients. Eur J Orthod. 2012;34:452–457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peretz B, Gotler M, Kaffe I. Common errors in digital panoramic radiographs of patients with mixed dentition and patients with permanent dentition. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Gangavati R, Baad R, Siddhartha Varma V, et al. An insight into the radiographic practice among the dentists of Karad City, India. Eur J Pharm Med Res. 2016;3:368–373.
   Google Scholar
• Pakbaznejad Esmaeili E, Waltimo-Siren J, Laatikainen T, et al. Application of segmented dental panoramic tomography among children: positive effect of continuing education in radiation protection. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2016;45:20160104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dula K, Benic GI, Bornstein M, et al. SADMFR guidelines for the use of cone-beam computed tomography/digital volume tomography. Swiss Dent J. 2015;125:945–953.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lang-Runtz H. Stress in dentistry: it can kill you. J Can Dent Assoc. 1984;50:539–541.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weissman BJ, Serman NJ. The law and who can expose dental radiographs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000;90:663–665.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawood A, Patel S, Brown J. Cone beam CT in dental practice. Br Dent J. 2009;207:23–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, et al. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:219–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kadesjo N, Lynds R, Nilsson M, et al. Radiation dose from X-ray examinations of impacted canines: cone beam CT vs two-dimensional imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018;20170305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaju PP, Jaju SP. Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45:263–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar