Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

The Modern Dental Practice

I modern dentistry_ intraoral imaging Choosing intraoral radiography Author_ Joel Karafin _Ninety-eight percent of radiographs are still taken intraorally. It’s certainly simple to buy whatever your rep suggests. But he isn’t the one who has to live with the choice. Here are some decision points you may want to consider. _Image quality If you’re not getting great images, what’s the point? High-contrast, high-resolution images yield better diagnoses, easier patient acceptance and more production. So how do you know what systems will yield great images? The last peer-reviewed research on the topic was in 2013, in the December issue of OOOO. In the article*, a result chart shows some clear leaders. Combining results for both contrast and spatial resolution, the leaders bunched at the top. In alphabetical order, they were Carestream, DEXIS, Gendex and XDR. The old Schick Elites didn’t make the cut, but the Schick 33s were just coming out; you may want to add them to the list. You can even buy the same phantom** they used and do the tests for yourself. Interestingly, the system’s software seemed to be important. Belgold’s offering performed poorly even though they were using the same pixel technology as XDR; XDR’s software seemed to make the difference. _Getting the shot If you can’t capture the entire canine in your PA, or can’t image its distal aspect in your bitewing, then you just end up taking extra radiographs, wasting time and needlessly exposing your patient. So check out the length of each sensor’s actual imaging area. And check out each sensor’s dead space, especially at the narrow edge where the cord is. Every millimeter of dead space there makes it that much harder to capture the canine/premolar contact with proper paralleling technique. 12 I

Pages Overview