ABSTRACT
Aim: The study aims to determine the frequency of positioning errors, record the number of diagnostically inappropriate images, and assess the quality of panoramic radiographs. Materials and Methods: In this study, a total of 2629 patients for whom orthopantomogram were selected out of 3900 new patients between August 2020 and June 2021. The positioning errors of the radiographs were evaluated and categorized into ten groups. The quality of the radiographs is further assessed as "Excellent," "Diagnostically Acceptable," and "Diagnostically Unacceptable." Results: Out of the total radiographs, 32.8% had no errors, and 77.2% of the radiographs had one or more positioning errors. The radiographs were analyzed in detail, and the errors found in the panoramic radiographs were recorded. The most common positioning error observed in the radiograph was error 8, failure to place the tongue close to the palate. Conclusion: The results and evaluation inferred that attention to patient positioning and focusing on reducing diagnostically indecent images could improve the quality of panoramic radiographs. Proper instructions to the patient, patient preparation, appropriate positioning of the patient, and the technician's skill plays a vital role in reducing diagnostic errors in Panoramic Radiography.
Résumé Objectif: L'étude vise à déterminer la fréquence des erreurs de positionnement, à enregistrer le nombre d'images diagnostiques inappropriées et à évaluer la qualité des radiographies panoramiques. qualité des radiographies panoramiques. Matériaux et méthodes: Dans cette étude, un total de 2629 patients pour lesquels l'orthopantomogramme a été sélectionné. sur 3900 nouveaux patients entre août 2020 et juin 2021. Les erreurs de positionnement des radiographies ont été évaluées et classées en dix groupes. La qualité des radiographies est ensuite évaluée comme "Excellente", "Diagnostiquement acceptable" et "Diagnostiquement inacceptable". Résultats: Sur l'ensemble des radiographies, 32,8 % ne présentaient aucune erreur, et 77,2 % des radiographies présentaient une ou plusieurs erreurs de positionnement. Les radiographies ont été analysées en détail, et les erreurs trouvées dans les radiographies panoramiques ont été enregistrées. L'erreur de positionnement la plus courante observée sur l'erreur 8, à savoir le fait de ne pas placer la langue près du palais. Conclusion: Les résultats et l'évaluation ont permis de déduire que l'attention portée au positionnement du patient et la réduction des images indécentes sur le plan diagnostique peuvent améliorer la qualité des radiographies panoramiques. Une bonne communication avec le patient, le technicien passant plus de temps à positionner le patient et la compétence du technicien sont les clés du contrôle et de la réduction des erreurs de diagnostic dans les radiographies panoramiques. et la réduction des erreurs de diagnostic en radiographie panoramique Mots clés: Artefacts, images fantômes, panoramiques, radiographies.
Subject(s)
Social Group , Humans , Radiography, Panoramic/methods , Diagnostic Errors , RadiographyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the oral and dental manifestations in non- diabetic and diabetic uraemic patients who were undergoing haemodialysis and to estimate and compare the salivary pH in these two groups. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety Seven uraemic patients who were undergoing maintenance haemodialysis were included in the study. Subjective and objective findings were evaluated and recorded in a specially designed proforma. Predialytic unstimulated whole salivary pH was recorded by using pH-measuring strips. Dental health assessment consisted of DMFT and CPITN indices. RESULTS: A subjective oral manifestation of dysguesia was found to be more significant in non-diabetic patients (p<0.008). Statistically, a high significance was observed with mucosal petechiae in 31.9% patients of diabetic group .The overall DMFT score was significantly higher in diabetic group. A moderate significance was found with a CPI score of 5 (p<0.015). The pH of saliva was significantly higher among diabetic patients. CONCLUSION: The diabetic subjects who were on haemodialysis were at a high risk for developing periodontal disease and they exhibited a potential threat for dental decay and xerostomia. A lower salivary pH and a poor glycaemic control may affect their oral health. Further research is required to clarify the combined influence of diabetic nephropathy on oral health.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of aloe vera gel in the treatment of oral lichen planus when compared with triamcinolone acetonide. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A randomized, double-blind, clinical trial was designed. The study sample constituted 40 patients (23 males and 17 females) who were randomly divided into two equal groups. Group A patients received aloe vera gel, while group B patients received triamcinolone acetonide. RESULTS: Forty patients were included in the study. Most of the sample presented with erosive (n = 18) and atrophic (n = 14) variants of oral lichen planus. When clinical signs and symptoms were observed after 8 weeks of therapy, it was determined that aloe vera gel was more effective than triamcinolone acetonide in the treatment of oral lichen planus. CONCLUSION: Aloe vera gel can be considered a safe alternative treatment for oral lichen planus.