NİLÜFER ERSAN, Zehra SEMANUR DÖLEKOĞLU, Erdoğan FİŞEKÇİOĞLU, Dilhan İLGÜY

Diş hekimliği öğrencileri tarafından alınan dijital periapikal radyografilerin kalite değerlendirilmesi

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, paralel ve açıortay tekniklerini teorik olarak öğrenen ancak pratik eğitimde dental fantom model üzerinde yalnızca paralel tekniği kullanan 3. sınıf diş hekimliği öğrencileri tarafından açıortay tekniği kullanılarak alınan dijital periapikal radyografilerin kalitesinin değerlendirilmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: İlk muayene sırasında 3. sınıf öğrencileri tarafından fosfor plaklar ile açıortay tekniği kullanılarak alınan dijital periapikal radyografilerin kalitesi değerlendirildi. Işın kaynağının açısı, filmin yerleştirilmesi ve ışınlanması ile ilgili radyografi hataları, tekrar gerektiren radyografiler ve radyografisi alınan dişlerin tipi kaydedildi. Bulgular: Bu çalışmada 288 dijital periapikal radyografi (53 maksiller anterior, 26 mandibular anterior, 109 maksiller posterior, 100 mandibular posterior) değerlendirilmiştir. Tekrar gerektiren radyografi oranı %13,5 olarak bulunmuştur. İlgili diş kökünün tümüyle görüntülenememesine bağlı hata, radyografilerin %20.1'inde görülmüştür. 'Cone-cut' görülme oranı %28.1 iken, açılandırma hatası radyografilerin %36,8'inde gözlemlenmiştir. Sonuç: Bu çalışmada 3. sınıf öğrencilerinin aldığı radyografilerde tekrar oranı yüksek bulunmuştur. Öğrencilerin klinik performanslarının değerlendirilmesi eğitim sürecindeki eksikliklerin belirlenmesi, müfredatın geliştirilmesi ve hasta güvenliğinin sağlanması açısından önemlidir. Müfredat açıortay tekniğinin de pratik eğitime katılmasını içerecek şekilde değiştirilmelidir.

Evaluation of digital periapical radiographs obtained by dental students

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of digital periapical radiographs obtained using bisecting angle technique by 3rd grade dental students, who were theoretically taught on paralleling and bisecting angle techniques and had the practical experience only for the paralleling technique on dental phantom models. Materials and Methods: The quality digital periapical radiographs, taken with photostimulable phosphor plates (PSPs) by 3rd year dental students during the initial examination, was evaluated. The type of the teeth, errors on the radiographs related with angulation of the tube head, placement and exposure of the film, and the radiographs, which needed repetition, were recorded. Results: Overall 288 digital periapical radiographs (53 maxillary anterior, 26 mandibular anterior, 109 maxillary posterior, 100 mandibular posterior) were evaluated. The percentage of radiographs that needed repetition was found as 13.5%. The percentage of positioning errors related to the visibility of the apex was 20,1%. The percentage of the presence of conecut was 28,1%. Overall rate of angulation error was found to be 36,8%.Conclusions: The need for repetition of periapical radiographs taken by 3rd grade dental students seems to be high. Evaluation of the clinical performance of the dental students is needed to identify the deficiencies in teaching/learning process, and for improvement of the dentomaxillofacial radiology curriculum and provision of patient safety. Dental curriculum should be revised, so that the practical courses including bisecting angle technique as well as paralleling technique was taught both theoretically and practically.

PDF

___

1. ADA (American Dental Association), Commission on Dental Accreditation. Accreditation standards for dental education facilities. Chicago 1988;16.
2. ADA (American Dental Association), Commissionon Dental Accreditation. Accreditation standards for dental education programs. Chicago, 1998, IL; c1995-2007 (updated 2005 Mar 14; cited 2007 Aug 29).
3. ADEA (American Dental Education Association). Competencies for the new dentist. J Dent Educ 2006;70:757- 759.
4. FGDP (The Faculty of General Dental Practice). Key skills in primary dental care: the indispensible e-learning package. London, UK, 2007. (updated 2007 Jul 26; cited 2007 Aug 29).
5. Razmus TF, Williamson GF, Van Dis ML. Assessment of the knowledge of graduating American dental students about the panoramic image. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;76:397-402.
6. White S, Pharoah MJ. Oral Radiology Principles and Interpretation. 6th ed. Mosby Elsevier; 2009.
7. Mourshed F. The undergraduate dental radiology curriculum. J Dent Educ 1979;43:680-682.
8. Patel JR. Intraoral radiographic errors. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1979;48:479-483.
9. Patel JR, Greer DF. Evaluating student progress through error reduction in intraoral radiographic technique. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1986;62:471-474.
10. Felippe MCS, Nassri MRG, Burgos PG, de Freitas SFT, Lage-Marques JL. Qualidade de radiografias periapicais realizadas por graduandos durante o tratamento endodôntico. / Quality of periapical radiographs taken by undergraduate students during endodontic treatment. RSBO 2009;6:63-69.
11. de Carvalho PL, Neves ACC, de Medeiros JMF, Zöllner NA, Rosa LCL, de Carvalho Almedia ETDC. Technical errors in intraoral radiographs performed by undergraduate students. / Erros técnicos nas radiografias intrabucais realizadas por alunos de graduação. RGO 2009;57:151- 155.
12. Fortier AP. Common errors in dental radiography. J Dent Educ 1979;43:683-684.
13. Gasparini D, Vaz EMS, Haiter Neto F, Boscolo FN. Analysis of radiographical errors performed by students of the Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, in the period of 1975 to 1988. / Análise de erros radiográficos cometidos por alunos da Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, no período de 1975a 1988. Rev Odontol Univ São Paulo 1992;6:107-114.
14. dos Anjos Pontual ML, Veloso HHP, dos Anjos Pontual A, da Fonseca Silveira MM. Intrabucal radiographs errors made at Pernambuco dental school-Brazil. / Errores en radiografias intrabucales realizadas en la facultad de odontologia de Pernambuco - Brasil. Acta Odontol Venez 2005;43:19-24.
15. Eliasson S, Lavstedt S, Wouters F, Östlin L. Quality of intraoral radiographs sent by private dental practitioners for therapy evaluation by the Social Insurance Office. Swed Dent J 1990;14:81-88.