Blog
About

10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Image quality of intraoral radiographs used by general practitioners in prosthodontic treatment planning.

      Dento maxillo facial radiology

      Diagnostic Errors, General Practice, Dental, standards, Humans, Insurance Claim Reporting, Insurance, Dental, Jaw, Edentulous, Partially, radiography, Patient Care Planning, State Dentistry, Prosthodontics, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Radiography, Dental, Reproducibility of Results, Denture, Partial, Fixed

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A number of studies have shown a low standard of radiographic image quality in general dental practices. Image quality was evaluated on 1094 radiographs from 100 consecutive cases submitted to a dental insurance office for approval of planned prosthodontic treatment. It was found that only 404 radiographs were without any type of error and that 690 radiographs had a total of 959 errors. The most common errors were projection and film density errors. The number of submitted radiographs ranged from one to 40. Nearly every fourth tooth proposed for treatment was not properly documented. The results also showed that 43 of 100 cases did not meet the criteria for acceptance for assessment of the proposed prosthodontic treatment. This means that they were incompletely documented radiographically so that the treatment plan could not be evaluated. This study suggests that new or additional radiographic documentation ought to be requested frequently before approval of proposed treatment plans.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          8181659
          10.1038/dmfr.23.1.8181659

          Comments

          Comment on this article