A well-defined incisive canal could be detected in the majority of spiral CT scans. Its radiographic detection remained lower than for the mandibular canal or mental foramen, but higher than for the visibility of the lingual foramen. Visualisation of the incisive canal and the occasional presence of an anterior looping, demonstrates the potential value of cross-sectional imaging of the anterior mandible for presurgical planning purposes.

No abstract

The aim of this study was to gather data on occupational health effects among Flemish dentists. A questionnaire on various potential health effects was sent out to randomly selected Flemish dentists. Pilot experimental studies were performed on hearing and sensory function of the fingers on small groups of dentists. Audiometric data of both ears, gathered with an interval of 10 years, were analysed. Sensory tests of the fingers were performed for dominant and non-dominant hands in relation to exposure time to (ultra)sonic equipment. Positive responses for the questionnaire were as follows: low back pain, 54% (stress-correlated); vision problems, 52.3% (age-correlated); infections, 9%; allergies, 22.5% (mainly latex); stress level was scored 7 on a scale from 0 to 10; diminished sensitivity of the fingertips, 6% and auditory disorders, 19.6%. Pilot audiometric data showed a hearing loss at 4,000 Hz for the left ear, presumably indicative of occupational noise trauma. The two-point discrimination ability of the dominant hand tended to diminish in line with the number of years of practice. Dentists in Flanders were found to suffer from various health-related problems. More elaborate studies are required to provide more details on the risks for occupational hearing impairment and vibration hand neuropathy and to determine whether the problems described were related to the practice of dentistry.

The implementation of standards of quality care for radiography and radiation protection could be improved among Belgian dentists. An elaborate educational programme in dental radiography is a prerequisite. Furthermore, recommendations could help to attain a change in attitude towards the use of ionizing radiation in order to meet European guidelines.

The study failed to demonstrate significant differences in the outcome of the peri-implant bone for two implant systems with different surface characteristics. The marginal bone level around oral implants changed <0.5 mm after 15 years of loading.

A rather wide range of patient radiation doses can be found for digital panoramic units. There is a tendency for lower effective doses for digital compared with analogue panoramic units, reported in previous studies.

A survey was performed among Belgian dentists to evaluate the use and management of digital radiographic equipment. The majority of respondents work as general dental practitioners. One out of eight sets of equipment for extraoral exposures is digital. For intraoral radiography, 30% of the equipment is digital. While exposure time is reduced by about 50% for digital intraoral radiography compared with conventional radiography, no differences can be found between different conventional film speed classes. Appropriate collimation of the radiation beam is only sparingly used. Beam aiming devices to hold the film and position the radiation beam are not used by the majority of dentists. While 25% of the respondents stand behind a protective wall during exposure, 8% of dentists remain next to the patient during exposure while assisting in holding the film inside the mouth. A minority of the latter practitioners wear lead aprons.

One of the main advantages of digital imaging is the possibility of altering display options for improved image interpretation. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the subjective image quality of direct digital panoramic images and compare the results with those obtained from conventional images. Furthermore, the effect of various filter settings on image interpretation was assessed. Panoramic images were obtained with three different types of panoramic equipment (one direct digital and two conventional units) from three groups of 54 patients with a natural dentition in all quadrants. The first series of panoramic images consisted of 54 unprocessed digital images; conventional film images (n = 108) comprised the second and third series. A final series consisted of the digital images treated with three different filters ("smoothening," "sharpening," and "contrast enhancement"). All images were scored randomly by four experts in oral radiology on a 4-point rating scale. The results showed a statistically significant difference in scorings between the conventional and digital panoramic units. The main reason for poor image quality appeared to be a combination of blurring and overlapping in the panoramic image. The premolar region in the upper jaw was the region where most additional radiographs were needed.