Premium
A laboratory model for dental radiographic studies
Author(s) -
JENKINS S.M.,
DUMMER P.M.H.
Publication year - 1995
Publication title -
journal of oral rehabilitation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.991
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1365-2842
pISSN - 0305-182X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1995.tb00219.x
Subject(s) - alveolar crest , radiography , tilt (camera) , dental alveolus , beam (structure) , amalgam (chemistry) , standard deviation , opacity , orthodontics , position (finance) , dentistry , mathematics , optics , geometry , medicine , physics , statistics , radiology , electrode , quantum mechanics , finance , economics
summary Though a number of laboratory models have been developed to study the effects of X‐ray geometry on the appearance and relative positions of anatomical landmarks, such as the amelocemental junction and alveolar crest, many have failed to take into account the three‐dimensional nature of the alveolus and its spatial relationships with the teeth. As a result, the findings of many ex vivo investigations must be questioned. The aim of this investigation was to develop and refine a new laboratory method for experimental dental radiography utilizing a series of anatomical radio‐opaque acrylic models containing extracted teeth. The method allows adjustment of the beam‐object relationship through the use of precision‐made wedges, which are able to tilt the models through a series of angles thus simulating in vivo changes in both vertical and horizontal X‐ray beam angulation. The technique is capable of being used in studies involving assessment of alveolar bone height or the depth of carious lesions. The precision of the method was tested by radiographing in nine different positions a test device consisting of four small cylindrical amalgam fillings embedded in a perspex sheet. Following removal and replacement, exposures of the test device were repeated for each position. Five linear distances between pairs of fillings were selected and measured on each radiograph to give a total of 45 measurements per set of films. There was exact agreement in 39 of the measurements recorded and a discrepancy of ±0.1 mm in the remaining six. The estimated standard deviation for variation on repeat radiography was 0.258 and the 95% confidence interval 0.214 to 0.325. The precision of the apparatus was thus found to be adequate for the measurement of differences in small distances.