Sensitometric and image quality performance of "rapid" intraoral film processing techniques.
| dc.contributor.author | Czajka, Jaddy | |
| dc.contributor.author | Rushton, V E | |
| dc.contributor.author | Shearer, A C | |
| dc.contributor.author | Horner, K | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2010-04-08T10:52:42Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2010-04-08T10:52:42Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 1996-01 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Sensitometric and image quality performance of "rapid" intraoral film processing techniques. 1996, 69 (817):49-58 Br J Radiol | en |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0007-1285 | |
| dc.identifier.pmid | 8785621 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10541/95985 | |
| dc.description.abstract | A number of products are available to dentists for the rapid production of intraoral radiographic films but there is little information on their relative merits. This study evaluated the performance of five "rapid" film processing products commonly used by British dentists in comparison with standard Kodak manual processing. Two Perspex contrast-detail test objects were made in order to investigate threshold contrast. Film speed, film gradient, limiting resolution and threshold contrast results are presented. Rapid processing systems possessed lower film speed when compared with Kodak Ektaspeed film and standard Kodak processing. The speed of E-speed film was found to be lower than that of D-speed film when used with Westone "Rapid X-ray" processing. Overall image quality was generally similar for all film/processing combinations evaluated, with the exception of Nix QP which gave markedly poorer image quality. | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en |
| dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
| dc.subject.mesh | Radiography, Dental | |
| dc.subject.mesh | Sensitivity and Specificity | |
| dc.subject.mesh | Technology, Radiologic | |
| dc.subject.mesh | X-Ray Film | |
| dc.title | Sensitometric and image quality performance of "rapid" intraoral film processing techniques. | en |
| dc.type | Article | en |
| dc.contributor.department | North Western Medical Physics Department, Christie Hospital, Manchester, UK. | en |
| dc.identifier.journal | The British Journal of Radiology | en |
| html.description.abstract | A number of products are available to dentists for the rapid production of intraoral radiographic films but there is little information on their relative merits. This study evaluated the performance of five "rapid" film processing products commonly used by British dentists in comparison with standard Kodak manual processing. Two Perspex contrast-detail test objects were made in order to investigate threshold contrast. Film speed, film gradient, limiting resolution and threshold contrast results are presented. Rapid processing systems possessed lower film speed when compared with Kodak Ektaspeed film and standard Kodak processing. The speed of E-speed film was found to be lower than that of D-speed film when used with Westone "Rapid X-ray" processing. Overall image quality was generally similar for all film/processing combinations evaluated, with the exception of Nix QP which gave markedly poorer image quality. |