Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Contacts Login 
Home Print this page Email this page Users Online: 636

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 21-24

Audit of the quality of intraoral periapical radiograph: An institutional study


Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Nair Hospital Dental College, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Sunita Shankarrao Patankar
Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Nair Hospital Dental College, Mumbai, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jomr.jomr_12_19

Rights and Permissions

Objectives: To reduce the radiation exposure to patients, to improve the diagnostic proficiency of radiographs, and to collect data which will help decide the action of improvement in performance. Materials and Methods: The audit consisted of two cycles: Audit Cycle 1 analyzed randomly selected 400 recently taken intraoral periapical (IOPA) radiograph and the quality of each film was recorded according to subjective quality rating of radiograph given by the national board of radiation protection (NPRB) guidance and put them into Grades 1, 2, or 3. Audit Cycle 2 radiographs from Grades 2 and 3 were further randomly reevaluated to determine the causes of error and these are classified into faults due to positioning, exposure, and chemical processing. Frequency (n) and percentage (%) of outcome of various grades overall and with respect to independent variables will be compared using Chi-square test. Results: Of the 400 IOPA radiographs, 180 (45%) score Grade 1, 165 (41.3%) score Grade 2, and 55 (13.8%) score Grade 3. In Grade 2, IOPA radiographs of 163 (40.7%) were found to be positioning error, 45 (11.2%) exposure error, and 9 (5.5%) chemical processing. In Grade 3 (out of 57 IOPA), radiographs were rejected due to positioning faults in 45 (28.8%), exposure error in 7 (4.3%), and chemical processing in 3 (1.8%). Conclusion: The overall quality of radiographs was not found to be satisfactory when compared with standard recommendations of the National Board of Radiation Protection of UK. When the audit of the quality was done at regular intervals, it can be used as a guide to effective dose reduction and reduction of unnecessary irradiation of the patients and staff.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed234    
    Printed11    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded76    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal