Loading…

The influence of image display systems on observers’ preference for visualizing subtle dental radiographic abnormalities

The objectives of this study were to assess observers’ preference for standard screens (SSs) or medical displays (MDs) in visualizing difficult-to-diagnose radiographic dental abnormalities and their preference for dental filter tools when utilized with MD systems. A retrospective data set of 60 in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology, 2021-10, Vol.132 (4), p.475-482
Main Authors: Shujaat, Sohaib, Letelier, Carolina, De Grauwe, Annelore, Desard, Hadewych, Orhan, Kaan, Vasconcelos, Karla de Faria, Mangione, Francesca, Coucke, Wim, Jacobs, Reinhilde
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The objectives of this study were to assess observers’ preference for standard screens (SSs) or medical displays (MDs) in visualizing difficult-to-diagnose radiographic dental abnormalities and their preference for dental filter tools when utilized with MD systems. A retrospective data set of 60 in vivo radiographs consisting of intraoral (n = 20), panoramic (n = 20), and cone beam computed tomography (n = 20) images was created. Three image display monitors, including an SS, an MD, and an MD with 3 dental filter configurations (bone–low density enhancement filter, tooth–high density enhancement filter, and a combined filter representing regular MD), were utilized to assess 4 observers’ monitor preferences in detecting radiographically subtle dental abnormalities. The data were analyzed by using binomial distribution. A P value ≤.05 was considered statistically significant. Although observers expressed preference for MD for visualizing some abnormalities when examining intraoral and panoramic radiographs, MD was not preferred for detection of any abnormalities with cone beam computed tomography. There were no significant differences in preference for SS or MD overall (P ≥ .2024). Observers expressed significant preference for the filters in visualizing all but 2 abnormalities (P ≤ .0252). The use of MD monitors enabled with dental filter tools may be preferred for visualizing certain subtle abnormalities.
ISSN:2212-4403
2212-4411
2212-4411
DOI:10.1016/j.oooo.2020.12.021