• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.109-120
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was first to analyze the utilization of dental examination through questionnaire to develop a diagnostic reference level of patient doses for dental radiography in korea. 77 dental institutions were classified into three groups: A group for the dental hospitals of the college of dentistry (11 institutions), B group for dental hospitals (30 institutions) and C group for dental clinics (36 institutions). The results were as follows : The mean numbers of unit chairs and medical staffs were 140.2, 15.3 and 5.8 sets, 112.6, 7.3 and 1.7 dentists, 3.1, 0.5 and no one radiologic technologists, and 19.7, 12.5 and 3.3 dental hygienists in A, B and C groups, respectively. The mean numbers of dental X-ray equipments were 14.64, 3.21 and 2.19 in A, B and C groups, respectively. Intraoral dental X-ray unit was used the most, the following equipments were panoramic, cephalometric, and cone-beam CT units. The most used X-ray imaging system was also digital system (above 50%) in all three groups. Insight dental film (Kodak, USA) having high sensitivity was routinely used for periapical radiography. The automatic processor was not used in many dental institutions, but the film-holding device was used in many dental institutions. The utilization rates of PACS in A, B and C groups were 90.9%, 83.3% and 16.7% respectively, and the PACS software program was used the most PiView STAR (Infinitt, Korea). The annual mean number of radiographic cases in one dental institution in 2008 for A group was 6.8 times and 21.2 times more than those for B and C groups, and periapical and panoramic radiographs were taken mostly. Tube voltage (kVp) and tube current (mA) for periapical radiography were similar in all three groups, but exposure time in C group was 12.0 times and 3.5 times longer than those in B and C groups. The amount of radiation exposure in C group, in which dental hygienists take dental radiographs, was more than those in other groups. The exposure parameters for panoramic radiography were similar in all three groups. In conclusion, the exposure parameters in dental radiography should be determined with reference level, not past experiences. Use of automatic processor and film-holding devices reduces the radiation exposure in film system. The quality assurance of dental equipments are necessary for the reduction of the patient dose and the improvement of X-ray image quality.