Kualitas radiograf periapikal dengan teknik paralel di Rumah Sakit Gigi dan Mulut Universitas Padjadjaran

Quality of periapical radiographs with parallel techniques in Universitas Padjadjaran Dental Hospital

Farah Fathiyya, Farina Pramanik, Ria Noerianingsih Firman

Abstract


Pendahuluan: Radiografi sering digunakan untuk pemeriksaan penunjang utama dalam menegakkan diagnosis kelainan periapikal dan yang paling sering digunakan adalah teknik intraoral periapikal. Menegakkan diagnosis secara tepat harus memperhatikan kualitas radiograf, karena digunakan sebagai alat bantu dalam penegakan diagnosis, penentuan rencana perawatan, dan evaluasi pasca perawatan. Teknik periapikal paralel menjadi pilihan terbaik karena dapat menghasilkan radiograf dengan distorsi minimal dan akurasi linier yang lebih akurat. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk melihat kualitas radiograf perapikal dengan teknik paralel di Rumah Sakit Gigi dan Mulut Universitas Padjajaran. Metode: Jenis penelitian ini adalah deskriptif. Populasi penelitian adalah seluruh radiograf dengan teknik paralel pada tahun 2018. Sampel penelitian ditentukan dengan metode consecutive sampling pada bulan Oktober-Desember 2018, sehingga didapatkan sebanyak 52 sampel radiograf periapikal dengan teknik paralel. Hasil: Terdapat 27 radiograf periapikal (56%) memiliki kriteria penilaian sempurna, 22 radiograf periapikal (42%) memiliki kriteria penilaian dapat diterima secara diagnostik dengan terdapat beberapa kesalahan, dan 3 radiograf periapikal (6%) memiliki penilaian tidak baik sehingga tidak dapat diterima secara diagnostik berdasarkan National Radiological Protection Board serta pemenuhan kriteria kualitas paling banyak adalah kontras dan distorsi ukuran. Simpulan: Kualitas radiografi periapikal dengan teknik paralel di RSGM UNPAD secara umum dapat diterima secara diagnostik dengan penilaian kualitas berada pada rating 1 yaitu, tidak adanya kesalahan dari persiapan pasien, eksposure, posisi film holder, dan pengolahan film, serta dikatakan sempurna secara visual.

Kata kunci: Kualitas radiograf, teknik periapikal paralel

 

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Radiographs are often used for primary investigations in the diagnosis of periapical abnormalities, and the most frequently used is the intraoral periapical technique. Establishing appropriate diagnosis emphasise the radiograph quality, because it is used as a tool in establishing diagnoses, determining treatment plans, and post-treatment evaluation. The parallel periapical technique is the best choice because they can produce radiographs with minimal distortion and more accurate linear accuracy. The purpose of this study was to observe the quality of parallel imaging radiographs in Universitas Padjadjaran Dental Hospital. Methods: The type of research was descriptive. The study population was all radiographs with parallel techniques in 2018. The study sample was determined by the consecutive sampling method in October-December 2018, resulting in 52 samples of periapical radiographs with parallel technique. Results: There were 27 periapical radiographs (56%) with perfect assessment criteria, 22 periapical radiographs (42%) had diagnostic criteria of acceptable with several errors, and 3 periapical radiographs (6%) had poor assessment, so they were not acceptable for diagnostic use based on the National Radiological Protection Board and the fulfilment of the most quality criteria was the contrast and size distortion. Conclusion: The periapical radiographs quality with parallel techniques in Universitas Padjadjaran Dental Hospital can be generally accepted diagnostically with the assessment of quality at rating 1, namely, the absence of errors from patient’s preparation, exposure, film holder position, and film processing, and is said to be visually perfect.

Keywords: Radiograph quality, parallel periapical technique

Keywords


Kualitas radiograf, teknik periapikal paralel, radiograph quality, parallel periapical technique

Full Text:

PDF

References


White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology principle and interpretation. 5th ed. Los Angeles: Mosby Inc; 2009. h. 9, 109-135.

Butt A, Mahoney M, Savage NW. The impact of computer display performance on the quality of digital radiographs: A review. Aust Dent J 2012;57:16–23.

Supriyadi. Pedoman interpretasi radiograf lesi-lesi di rongga mulut. Stomatognatic. 2012;9:134–9.

Ahmed HMA. Guidelines to enhance the interpretation of two-dimensional periapical radiographic images in endodontics. Eur J Gen Dent 2015;4:12.

Goaz PW, White SC. Oral radiolog: principles and interpretation. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby Inc; 1998. h. 102-10.

Formoso NF, Mora. JM. A paralleling technique modification to determine the bone crest level around dental implants. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol J. 2011;34:385–9.

Whaites E. Essentials of dental radiography and radiology. 4th ed. UK: Elsevier; 2009. p 91-105:207-210.

Arachchi WME, Chandrasena W, Tudugala R, Jayasinghe RD. Reject analysis of intra-oral periapical (IOPA) radiographs of department of Radiology , Dental Teaching Hospital, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka. Periodontol J. 2015;1:62–5.

White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology principle and interpretation. 6th ed. Los Angeles: Mosby Inc; 2013. h. 110-27.

Khan SQ, Sobia AHAI, Mehdi H, Ashraf B. Quality assessment of lateral cephalometric. J Dent 2017;37(2):265–8.

Ibrahim MF, Aziz MS, Maxood A, Khan WU. Comparison of paralleling and bisecting angle techniques in endodontic working length radiography. J Endod. 2013;33(1):78–83.

Salami A, Halabi M Al, Hussein I, Kowash M. An audit on the quality of intra-oral digital radiographs taken in a postgraduate Paediatric Dentistry setting. J Dent 2017;1:14–7.

Chong BS, Miller J, Sidhu S. The quality of radiographs accompanying endodontic referrals to a health authority clinic. J Dent 2015;1:22–9.

Gupta A, Srivastava R, Jyoti B. Intra oral periapical radiography - basics yet intrigue: A review. J Dent 2014;4(2):83–7.

Almogbel AA. Quality of periapical radiographs taken by undergraduate quality of periapical radiographs taken by undergraduate dental students at Qassim University. J Dent 2018;1(December 2014):24–39.

Forsberg. J. A comparison ofthe paralleling and bisecting-angle radiographic techniques in endodontics. J Endod 2001;1:177–83.

Brady A. Error and discrepancy in radiology: Inevitable or avoidable? J Insights Imaging 2017;1:171–82.

Whaites E, Drage N. Dental panoramic tomography. 5th ed. Essentials of Dental Radiography and Radiology. Hongkong: Elsevier; 2013. h. 488.

Langland O, Langlais R, Preece J. Principles of dental imaging. 2nd ed. USA: Lippincott Williams & Walkins; 2016. h. 480.

Supriyadi. Distorsi radiografi periapikal pada berbagai regio gigi. Dentika Dent J 2012;3:33–6.

Frommer HH, J. JSS. Radiology for The Dental Professional. 4th ed. Missouri: Mosby Inc; 2005. h. 135-57.

Luker J. Quality assurance for dental radiography. Dent Nurs. 2014;10(8):458–60.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24198/pjdrs.v3i1.22178

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


       

      

  

Statistik Pengunjung

Creative Commons License
Padjadjaran Journal of Dental Researchers and Students dilisensikan di bawah Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License