Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A comparative study on image quality of two digital intraoral sensors.
Section of Oral Diagnostics and Surgery, Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.
Malmö University, Faculty of Odontology (OD).ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9885-0019
Section of Oral Diagnostics and Surgery, Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden; Section of Oral Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Clinical Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
2019 (English)In: Dento-Maxillo-Facial Radiology, ISSN 0250-832X, E-ISSN 1476-542X, Vol. 48, no 7, p. 1-5, article id 20190063Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to evaluate the subjective image quality and reliability of two digital sensors. In addition, the image quality of the two sensors evaluated by specialists and general dentists were compared. METHODS: 30 intraoral bitewings from five patients were included in the study, 15 were exposed with a Dixi sensor (CCD-based) and 15 with a ProSensor (CMOS-based) using modified parallel technique. Three radiologists and three general dentists evaluated the images in pair. A five-point scale was used to register the image quality. Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis was performed to compare the image quality and the observer agreement was assessed in terms of intra class correlation co-efficient. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found on image quality between the sensors. The average scores of the observer agreement were moderate with an average of 0.66 and an interval of 0.30 to 0.87, suggesting that there was a large variation on preference of image quality. However, there was a statistically significant difference in terms of the area under the VGC- curves between the specialist group and the general dentist group ( p = 0.043), in which the specialist group tended to favor the ProSensor. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective image quality of the two intraoral sensors were comparable when evaluated by both general and oral radiologists. However, the radiologists seemed to prefer the ProSensor to the Dixi as compared to general dentists. Inter- observer conformance showed a large variation on the preference of the image quality.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
British Institute of Radiology , 2019. Vol. 48, no 7, p. 1-5, article id 20190063
Keywords [en]
digital imaging, dental, digital sensors, image quality
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-6286DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20190063ISI: 000487315700007PubMedID: 31075041Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85072508934Local ID: 30161OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-6286DiVA, id: diva2:1403227
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-06-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Hellén-Halme, Kristina

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hellén-Halme, Kristina
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Dento-Maxillo-Facial Radiology
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 99 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf