» Articles » PMID: 24083211

Attitude of the Korean Dentists Towards Radiation Safety and Selection Criteria

Overview
Specialty Radiology
Date 2013 Oct 2
PMID 24083211
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: X-ray exposure should be clinically justified and each exposure should be expected to give patients benefits. Since dental radiographic examination is one of the most frequent radiological procedures, radiation hazard becomes an important public health concern. The purpose of this study was to investigate the attitude of Korean dentists about radiation safety and use of criteria for selecting the frequency and type of radiographic examinations.

Materials And Methods: The study included 267 Korean dentists. Five questions related to radiation safety were asked of each of them. These questions were about factors associated with radiation protection of patients and operators including the use of radiographic selection criteria for intraoral radiographic procedures.

Results: The frequency of prescription of routine radiographic examination (an example is a panoramic radiograph for screening process for occult disease) was 34.1%, while that of selective radiography was 64.0%. Dentists' discussion of radiation risk and benefit with patients was infrequent. More than half of the operators held the image receptor by themselves during intraoral radiographic examinations. Lead apron/thyroid collars for patient protection were used by fewer than 22% of dental offices. Rectangular collimation was utilized by fewer than 15% of dental offices.

Conclusion: The majority of Korean dentists in the study did not practice radiation protection procedures which would be required to minimize exposure to unnecessary radiation for patients and dental professionals. Mandatory continuing professional education in radiation safety and development of Korean radiographic selection criteria is recommended.

Citing Articles

Exposure and protection protocols of dentomaxillofacial imaging applied by paediatric dentists in Europe.

Mitsea A, Seremidi K, Christoloukas N, Gizani S Oral Radiol. 2024; 40(2):188-198.

PMID: 38191969 DOI: 10.1007/s11282-023-00720-8.


Awareness and practice of dentomaxillofacial imaging among paediatric dentists: a questionnaire survey of members of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry.

Gizani S, Seremidi K, Gkourtsogianni S, Mitsea A Oral Radiol. 2023; 39(3):576-587.

PMID: 36867317 DOI: 10.1007/s11282-023-00675-w.


Knowledge, attitude, and practice of lead aprons among dental practitioners and specialists.

Anushya P, Jayaraman M J Adv Pharm Technol Res. 2023; 13(Suppl 1):S12-S15.

PMID: 36643119 PMC: 9836117. DOI: 10.4103/japtr.japtr_230_22.


Assessment of Regional Diagnostic Reference Levels in Dental Radiography in Tamil Nadu.

Jose A, Kumar A, Govindarajan K, Sharma S J Med Phys. 2022; 47(1):86-92.

PMID: 35548027 PMC: 9084574. DOI: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_119_21.


Evaluation of Radiation Exposure in Open Dental Clinics Using Thermoluminescence Dosimeters and Questionnaires.

Basheer B, Allahim R, Alarfaj S, Alkharashi T, Fallatah A, Alqahtani A Contemp Clin Dent. 2021; 12(3):266-275.

PMID: 34759684 PMC: 8525804. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_598_20.


References
1.
Atchison K, White S, Flack V, Hewlett E . Assessing the FDA guidelines for ordering dental radiographs. J Am Dent Assoc. 1995; 126(10):1372-83. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1995.0048. View

2.
Matteson S, Joseph L, Bottomley W, Finger H, FROMMER H, Koch R . The report of the panel to develop radiographic selection criteria for dental patients. Gen Dent. 1991; 39(4):264-70. View

3.
Kantor M . Longitudinal trends in the use of individualized radiographic examinations at dental schools in the United States and Canada. J Dent Educ. 2006; 70(2):160-8. View

4.
de Araujo F, de Araujo D, dos Santos C, de Souza M . Diagnosis of approximal caries in primary teeth: radiographic versus clinical examination using tooth separation. Am J Dent. 1996; 9(2):54-6. View

5.
McCarley D . ADA Principles of Ethics and Code of Professional Conduct. Tex Dent J. 2011; 128(8):728-32. View