Dental radiology: conflicting advice and controversies

There are a number of areas where dental practices may receive conflicting advice from engineers, external agencies, trainers and other experts, as well as from articles in professional journals. This article outlines some areas of uncertainty and controversy in dental radiation protection.

Some dental practices use handheld dental x-ray machines. Their portability in practices that have several surgeries and low use of x-rays use provide some cost advantages, although dental professionals using them require training to ensure reproducible imaging.

Many handheld devices are available, so it would be prudent for the practice to consult its radiation protection adviser (RPA) before any purchase. This was highlighted when the use of one low-cost imported device—the Tianjie Dental Falcon—caused not only an alert from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (2012), but also made the front page of the Daily Mirror in December 2012 (Figure 1). (Gregory, 2012). Poor build quality and lack of collimation meant that the sets were found on testing to be irradiating the whole skull, giving the patient a significant radiation dose. Lack of shielding also meant that operators would receive a significant radiation dose, particularly to their hands.