Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology
EditorialThe Image Gently in Dentistry campaign: promotion of responsible use of maxillofacial radiology in dentistry for children
Section snippets
Background
In 1999 the Institute of Medicine (IOM) released a pivotal report concluding that some patient morbidity and mortality was a result of medical errors caused by faulty systems, processes, and conditions that lead people to make mistakes or fail to prevent them.1 IOM recommends “raising performance standards and expectations for improvements in safety through the actions of oversight organizations, professional groups, and group purchasers of health care.” Standards and expectations can be
Radiation Exposure From Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
Although individual doses from radiographic procedures in dentistry are relatively low, these examinations are quite common. There were an estimated 500 million intraoral bitewing and full-mouth radiographic procedures performed in 2006 in the United States,2 almost twice the number of conventional medical radiographic and fluoroscopic examinations combined. Furthermore, studies of various dental populations have found that there is a broad range of exposures used in dental offices.10 The
Promotion of Dose Reduction in Pediatric Imaging: Image Gently
In 2007, the Society for Pediatric Radiology reached out to organizations representing members of the entire health care team in pediatric radiology including radiologists (American College of Radiology), radiologic technologists (American Society of Radiologic Technologists), and medical imaging physicists (American Association of Physicists in Medicine) to found the Alliance for Radiation Safety in Pediatric Imaging (www.imagegently.org). The mission of the Alliance is to improve the safety
The Image Gently in Dentistry campaign
Image Gently provides guidance to professionals, parents, and patients in specific areas of diagnostic imaging including CT, fluoroscopy, digital radiography, interventional radiology, nuclear medicine, and ultrasonography. The newest initiative, set for public launch in September 2014 (to coincide with the annual session of the AAOMR in Orlando, FL, USA, and immediately before the annual meeting of the ADA in October in San Antonio, TX, USA), is the Image Gently in Dentistry campaign. The
Summary
The Image Gently in Dentistry campaign to be launched in September 2014 is a specific initiative of the Alliance for Radiation Safety in Pediatric Imaging, supported by organized dentistry and dental education as well as many dental specialty organizations. The objective of the campaign is to change practice by increasing awareness of the opportunities to improve radiation protection when imaging children in dental practices. Six practical steps are provided that underline the principle that
References (38)
- et al.
A review of patient dose and optimisation methods in adult and paediatric CT scanning
Eur J Radiol
(2012) - et al.
Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study
Lancet
(2012) - et al.
Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 international commission on radiological protection recommendations regarding dose calculation
J Am Dent Assoc
(2008) - et al.
Dental diagnostic X-ray exposure and risk of benign and malignant brain tumors
Ann Oncol
(2013) - et al.
Dental x-rays and risk of meningioma: the jury is still out
J Evid Based Dent Pract
(2012) - et al.
Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod
(2008) - et al.
Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners
Eur J Radiol
(2012) - et al.
American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology executive opinion statement on performing and interpreting diagnostic cone beam computed tomography
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod
(2008) - et al.
Dosimetry of a cone-beam computed tomography machine compared with a digital x-ray machine in orthodontic imaging
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
(2012) - et al.
Comparison of adult and child radiation equivalent doses from 2 dental cone-beam computed tomography units
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
(2013)
Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure
N Engl J Med
CT scans in young people in Northern England: trends and patterns 1993-2002
Pediatr Radiol
Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians
BMJ
The use of computed tomography in pediatrics and the associated radiation exposure and estimated cancer risk
JAMA Pediatr
Sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation. Scientific Annex B. Effects of radiation exposure of children
Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer
Arch Intern Med
Cited by (64)
The Role of Radiographic Imaging in the Diagnosis and Management of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases
2024, Dental Clinics of North AmericaRadiation doses in extraoral bitewing radiography compared with intraoral bitewing and panoramic radiography
2024, Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral RadiologyImage quality assessment of low-dose protocols in cone beam computed tomography of the anterior maxilla
2022, Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral RadiologyComparison of the diagnostic efficacy of 2D radiography and cone beam computed tomography in persistent apical periodontal disease: A PRISMA-DTA systematic review and meta-analysis
2021, Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral RadiologyCitation Excerpt :CBCT imparts an effective radiation dose calculated at approximately 52 to 1410 μSv for a large field of view (FOV: larger than 10 × 10 cm), 18 to 674 μSv for medium FOVs (8 × 5 and 10 × 10 cm), and 11 to 252 μSv for a small FOV (below 8 × 5 cm).74-76 2D radiographs result in an effective dose of 4.1 μSv for panoramic radiography and approximately 0.6 to 0.8 μSv for periapical radiography.77 Depending on the CBCT volume settings (e.g., Planmeca Promax 3D with a 4 × 5 cm FOV and Newtom 5G with a 6 × 6 cm FOV), these differences may represent up to 15 to 140 times higher radiation doses than conventional 2D radiographs.77