You are in the accessibility menu

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/15979
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSchropp, Lars-
dc.contributor.authorStavropoulos, Andreas-
dc.contributor.authorSpin-Neto, Rubens-
dc.contributor.authorWenzel, Ann-
dc.date.accessioned2013-09-30T18:31:52Z-
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-20T13:45:25Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-25T16:59:27Z-
dc.date.available2013-09-30T18:31:52Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-20T13:45:25Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-25T16:59:27Z-
dc.date.issued2012-01-01-
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02180.x-
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Implants Research. Malden: Wiley-blackwell, v. 23, n. 1, p. 55-59, 2012.-
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/15979-
dc.identifier.urihttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/15979-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare a customized imaging guide and a standard film holder for obtaining optimally projected intraoral radiographs of dental implants.Material and methods: Intraoral radiographs of four screw-type implants with different inclination placed in an upper or lower dental phantom model were recorded by 32 groups of examiners after a short instruction in the use of the RB-RB/LB-LB mnemonic rule. Half of the examiners recorded the images using a standard film holder and the other half used a customized imaging guide. Each radiograph was assessed under blinded conditions with regard to rendering of the implant threads and was assigned to one of four quality categories: (1) perfect, (2) not perfect, but clinically acceptable, (3) not acceptable, and (4) hopeless.Results: For the upper jaw, the same number of exposures per implant were made to achieve an acceptable image (P = 0.86) by the standard film holder method (median = 2) and the imaging guide method (median = 2). For the lower jaw, medians for the imaging guide method and the film holder method were 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.004). For the imaging guide method, the first exposure was rated as perfect/acceptable in 62% of the cases and for the film holder method in 41% of the cases (P = 0.013). After <= 2 exposures, 78% (imaging guide method) and 69% (film holder method) of the implant images were perfect/acceptable (P=0.23). The implant inclination did not have a major influence on the outcomes.Conclusion: Perfect or acceptable images were achieved after two exposures with the same frequency either using a customized imaging guide method or a standard film holder method. However, the use of a customized imaging guide method was overall significantly superior to a standard film holder method in terms of obtaining perfect or acceptable images with only one exposure.en
dc.format.extent55-59-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell-
dc.sourceWeb of Science-
dc.subjectdentalen
dc.subjectimaging guideen
dc.subjectimplanten
dc.subjectintraoralen
dc.subjectradiographyen
dc.titleImplant image quality in dental radiographs recorded using a customized imaging guide or a standard film holderen
dc.typeoutro-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)-
dc.contributor.institutionAarhus University (AU)-
dc.description.affiliationAarhus Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Prosthet Dent, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark-
dc.description.affiliationAarhus Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Periodontol, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark-
dc.description.affiliationUNESP Univ Estadual Paulista, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Periodontol, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.description.affiliationAarhus Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Oral Radiol, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark-
dc.description.affiliationUnespUNESP Univ Estadual Paulista, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Periodontol, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02180.x-
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000298548900009-
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso restrito-
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Implants Research-
Appears in Collections:Artigos, TCCs, Teses e Dissertações da Unesp

There are no files associated with this item.
 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.