PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Johnson, K. Brandon
AU  - Mauriello, Sally M
AU  - Ludlow, John B.
AU  - Platin, Enrique
TI  - Technical Performance of Universal and Enhanced Intraoral Imaging Rectangular Collimators
DP  - 2015 Aug 01
TA  - American Dental Hygienists Association
PG  - 238--246
VI  - 89
IP  - 4
4099  - http://jdh.adha.org/content/89/4/238.short
4100  - http://jdh.adha.org/content/89/4/238.full
SO  - J Dent Hyg2015 Aug 01; 89
AB  - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the number and type of technical errors between 2 rectangular collimators, time/motion effort and radiographer preference.Methods: Subjects (n=17) were recruited to expose an 18 projection full mouth series (FMX) using Tru-Align™ (enhanced) and Rinn® (universal) collimator devices. Both FMXs were exposed using photostimulable phosphor (PSP) digital sensors on a DXTTR manikin with an intraoral x-ray unit. A 5-question survey evaluated ease of device use, time required and device preference. Data were analyzed using frequencies, paired t-test, ANOVA and least squares means using a general linear model.Results: A lower mean number of technique errors per FMX occurred with the enhanced device (9.7) compared to the universal device (12.1). Collimator centering errors occurred 3-times more often with the universal device. The mean numbers of diagnostically unacceptable errors per FMX were similar (Universal=3.2 vs Enhanced=2.9). The least squares means adjusted model showed a statistically significant difference of errors between the 2 devices (p=0.0478) and errors by location when comparing posterior to anterior and posterior to bitewing (p<0.0001). Subjects (94%) preferred the enhanced device and found it easier to use compared to the universal device. Significantly less time was needed to expose an FMX (4 min) when using the enhanced device (p=0.0001).Conclusion: The enhanced device enabled subjects to expose diagnostically acceptable radiographs more efficiently with fewer collimator centering errors; however, it does so with a 35% greater exposure area and a concomitant increase in patient dose.