Assessment of the radiological safety of a Genoray portable dental X-ray unit

Pooya, S.M. Hosseini; Hafezi, Ladan; Manafi, F; Talaeipour, A R

doi:10.1259/dmfr.20140255

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Este equipo fue diseñado no como un reemplazo del equipo radiológico convencional, sino como una ayuda, en misiones humanitarias (9), misiones militares, para uso en inspecciones de control de drogas y contrabando, uso forense, control de calidad, entre otros (8). Posteriormente se introdujeron en nuevos campos, por ejemplo, en las excavaciones arqueológicas (10) y en la atención domiciliar a pacientes con necesidades específicas y pacientes discapacitados (11).…”

Section: Equipos Radiográficos Portátilesunclassified

“…Debido al aumento en el riesgo de mayor radiación al operador (11) diversos autores e instituciones recomiendan que los EP solo deben usarse en una base y ser activados desde un área protegida (a distancia o detrás de una barrera) (12,13,18,29), con el fin de reducir la exposición del operador (12,18,29). Si bien las dosis pueden estar por debajo de los límites de dosis establecidos para el operador en un periodo de tiempo (13,30), la dosis al operador siempre es mayor que la dosis que recibiría operando un equipo de rayos x fijo o móvil (12,27,28).…”

Section: B C Aunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Update on Hand-Held X-Ray Devices in Dentistry: a Literature Review

Barba

Cascante-Sequeira

2021

Odovtos - Int J Dent Sc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last two decades, the use of portable intraoral X-ray devices, stabilized by the operator, has increased. While all radiographic devices present an inherent risk from ionizing radiation, improper use of portable devices can increase operator exposure. Use of portable devices on a tripod or powered from a protected area is recommended. However, in highly justified cases, for using without these accessories, recommendations should be followed to reduce operator exposure. Because radioprotection is essential when using X-rays, fixed dental radiographic devices should be favored over portable equipment since the first provides a lower radiation dose to the operator.

show abstract

Section: Equipos Radiográficos Portátilesunclassified

Section: B C Aunclassified

Update on Hand-Held X-Ray Devices in Dentistry: a Literature Review

Barba

Cascante-Sequeira

2021

Odovtos - Int J Dent Sc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Algunos ERDP incluyen una pantalla para ver la radiografía después de realizada una toma radiográfica con sensor digital (16) . Además, algunos ERDP disponen de un trípode, disparador a distancia o ambos, que pueden o no estar incluidos al comprar el equipo (5,6,17,18) .…”

Section: Componentes De Los Equipos Radiográficos Dentales Portátilesunclassified

Equipos radiográficos dentales portátiles: revisión de la literatura

Fuente-Alba

Rivas

2021

Av Odontoestomatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introducción: Los equipos radiográficos dentales portátiles (ERDP) son dispositivos transportables e inalámbricos cuyo uso se ha masificado. No se encontró revisiones de la literatura recientes que analicen comprehensivamente los ERPD. El propósito del presente artículo es analizar la información actual sobre componentes, características técnicas, forma de uso y recomendaciones de protección radiológica de los ERDP. Materiales y métodos: Se realizó una revisión de la literatura sobre ERDP de la última década en Scopus, PubMed y Web of Science, relacionando el término libre "handheld dental X-ray" y sus variantes a través del término booleano OR. Revisión: Los ERDP se diferencian de los equipos radiográficos fijos en que tienen una batería recargable y un blindaje externo de retrodispersión. Además, el miliamperaje es menor en ERDP, por lo que los tiempos de exposición son mayores. La forma de uso del ERDP para disminuir el riesgo de exposición a radiaciones ionizantes del operador es sostenerlo a la distancia de un antebrazo del cuerpo manteniendo la emisión del rayo central paralela al piso. Se describen recomendaciones asociadas a protección radiológica para el uso de los ERDP para proteger al paciente, operador y población general de los potenciales riesgos de las radiaciones ionizantes. Conclusión: La amplia variedad de ERPD y su distinta forma de uso, implica un potencial mayor riesgo de exposición a radiación al operador. Los ERDP no debieran considerarse un reemplazo de los equipos radiográficos fijos y su uso debería restringirse a situaciones en que sea imposible el uso equipos radiográficos fijos.

show abstract

“…[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] For these studies, the strength of conclusions is limited by aspects of the methodologies or study protocols. Key limiting factors in the methodologies include: use of an inappropriate phantom to represent the patient that could affect the stray radiation field that is measured, as opposed to a tissue-equivalent phantom that would accurately recreate the stray radiation field 6,7,10,11 ; use of inappropriate means or detector for measurement of radiation dose given the X-ray imaging technique, 7,11,14 and; inadequate number of measurement points, which may not adequately characterize the heterogeneous stray radiation field around the operator of a HIDXD. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] In the referenced previous studies, no more than 12 measurement points were used when the number of points was specified.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Key limiting factors in the methodologies include: use of an inappropriate phantom to represent the patient that could affect the stray radiation field that is measured, as opposed to a tissue-equivalent phantom that would accurately recreate the stray radiation field 6,7,10,11 ; use of inappropriate means or detector for measurement of radiation dose given the X-ray imaging technique, 7,11,14 and; inadequate number of measurement points, which may not adequately characterize the heterogeneous stray radiation field around the operator of a HIDXD. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] In the referenced previous studies, no more than 12 measurement points were used when the number of points was specified. Limiting factors with regards to radiation detectors include use of a detector with an inadequate response time of greater than 0.25 s which may not reliably measure the air kerma from shorter exposure times of dental X-ray devices which were used in previous studies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of stray radiation to the operator for five hand-held dental X-ray devices

Smith

Tremblay

Wardlaw

2019

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Evaluate stray radiation to the operator, as represented by a plane within the significant zone of occupancy (SZO), produced by five models of hand-held intraoral dental X-ray devices (HIDXDs). Methods: The stray radiation for five models of HIDXDs was measured, using an anthropomorphic tissue-equivalent head phantom as a scattering object. An ionization chamber was used to measure the air kerma (μGy) at 63 positions in a 160 cm high by 60 cm wide plane that was 10 cm behind the X-ray device, identified as being within the SZO. Results: Based on the measured air kerma from stray radiation of five different HIDXDs, the estimated annual air kerma at all measured spatial positions was calculated. When calculated using a median air kerma of 0.8 mGy at the distal end of the cone, as typically required for digital image receptors, 1 the ranges for estimated annual air kerma in the SZO across the devices were 0.14–0.77 mGy for the median, 0.41–1.01 mGy for the mean, and 1.32–2.55 mGy for the maximum. Similarly, when calculated using a median air kerma of 1.6 mGy as typically required for D-speed film, 2 the ranges for estimated annual air kerma across the devices were 0.28–1.54 mGy for the median, 0.83–2.03 mGy for the mean, and 2.64–5.10 mGy for the maximum. Conclusions: From measured air kerma values of stray radiation in the SZO, estimated annual exposures to the operator for HIDXDs are expected to be greater than from conventional wall-mounted or portable devices activated from a protected area (at a distance or behind shielding). HIDXDs should therefore only be used when patient accessibility makes their use necessary and the use of a portable device on a stand or a wall-mounted device is not reasonably feasible. This approach would keep occupational radiation exposures of dental workers as low as reasonably achievable.

show abstract

Assessment of the radiological safety of a Genoray portable dental X-ray unit

Abstract: Considering the annual organ dose limits, the eye lens dose limit is the main factor determining the frequency of system application.

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

Update on Hand-Held X-Ray Devices in Dentistry: a Literature Review

Update on Hand-Held X-Ray Devices in Dentistry: a Literature Review

Equipos radiográficos dentales portátiles: revisión de la literatura

Evaluation of stray radiation to the operator for five hand-held dental X-ray devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About