World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 3 ( March, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Comparable Performance Between a Novel Film Holder and the Snap-A-Ray® Xtra Film Holder for Child Patients

Jintanaporn Siripipat, Aungsuma Sumethchotimetha, Jitti Jittanit, Kunanon Chongthanakorn, Pansawalee Wiriyaattasombat, Phatsanan Chongousah, Warissara Tianthong

Keywords : Bitewing clear contact child film holder, Bitewing radiograph, Film holder, Overlapping, Snap-A-Ray Xtra®

Citation Information : Siripipat J, Sumethchotimetha A, Jittanit J, Chongthanakorn K, Wiriyaattasombat P, Chongousah P, Tianthong W. Comparable Performance Between a Novel Film Holder and the Snap-A-Ray® Xtra Film Holder for Child Patients. World J Dent 2024; 15 (3):222-227.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2404

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 20-04-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Aims: This study evaluated the diagnostic quality of bitewing radiographs and children's acceptance between the Snap-A-Ray® Xtra film holder and the novel bitewing clear contact (BCC) child film holder. Material and methods: A total of 120 bitewing radiographs were taken on the school-age participants within 6 months. At the initial visit, each participant was randomly assigned to have one side of their mouth imaged using the Snap-A-Ray® Xtra device, while the other used the BCC child film holder. After 6 months, the device used for each side was reversed. The diagnostic quality of the radiographs was assessed based on the degree of interproximal overlapping of adjacent teeth. The patients’ acceptance scores were recorded using the three schematic faces scale. The diagnostic quality was compared using sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test compared the children's acceptance. Results: Sensitivity and specificity values were 46.2 and 86.7% for the Snap-A-Ray® Xtra and 47.05 and 86.27% for BCC child film holders, respectively. The areas under the ROC curve for the Snap-A-Ray® Xtra were 0.695 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60–0.78] and 0.685 (95% CI, 0.59–0.77) for the BCC child film holder. Moreover, patients’ acceptance of the two film holders was similar (p = 0.218). Conclusion: There was no significant difference in radiographic diagnostic quality and patient acceptance between the two film holders. Therefore, the BCC child film holder can be used as an alternative bitewing film holder. Clinical significance: The BCC child film holder can be considered a viable alternative to conventional bitewing holders for pediatric dental radiography. Its design characteristics enable the acquisition of accurate radiographic images while potentially minimizing patient discomfort and anxiety during the procedure, which can be particularly beneficial when working with children.

PDF Share
  1. Casamassimo PS, Thikkurissy S, Edelstein B, et al. The human and economic cost of early childhood caries. J AM Dent Assoc 2009;140(6):650–657. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0250
  2. Ingamells H, Golenia K, Puryer J, et al. Prevalence of proximal caries in adults and children at Bristol Dental Hospital and South Bristol Community Hospital. Faculty Dent J 2018;9(1):24–29. DOI: 10.1308/rcsfdj.2018.24
  3. Muthu MS, Kirthiga M, Lee JC, et al. OXIS contacts as a risk factor for approximal caries: a retrospective cohort study. Pediatr Dent 2021;43(4):296–300. PMID: 34467847.
  4. Dean JA, Avery DR, Mcdonald RE. McDonald and Avery's Dentistry for the Child and Adolescent, 10th edition. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier; 2016.
  5. Nysether S, Hansen BF. Errors on dental bitewing radiographs. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1983;11(5):286–288. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1983.tb01895.x
  6. Herman HD, Ashkenazi M. Quality of bitewing radiographs in children in relation to the type of film holder used. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2013;14(3):141–146. DOI: 10.1007/s40368-013-0033-8
  7. Pierro VS, Barcelos R, de Souza IP, et al. Pediatric bitewing film holder: preschoolers’ acceptance and radiographs’ diagnostic quality. Pediatr Dent 2008;30(4):342–347. PMID: 18767515.
  8. Pitts NB, Hamood SS, Longbottom C, et al. The use of bitewing positioning devices in children's dentistry. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 1991;20(3):121–126. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20.3.1807994
  9. Kaakko T, Riedy CA, Nakai Y, et al. Taking bitewing radiographs in preschoolers using behavior management techniques. ASDC J Dent Child 2000;66(5):320–324. PMID: 10631887.
  10. Dixon D, Hildebolt C. An overview of radiographic film holders. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 2005;34(2):67–73. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/99945885
  11. Roberts MW, Mol A. Clinical techniques to reduce sensor plate damage in PSP digital radiography. J Dent Child (Chic) 2004;71(2):169–170. PMID: 15587103.
  12. The Reference Manual of Pediatric Dentistry. Chicago Ill: American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Pediatr Dent 2018;40(6):205–212.
  13. Maunuksela EL, Olkkola KT, Korpela R. Measurement of pain in children with self-reporting and behavioral assessment. Clin PharmacolTher 1987;42(2):137–141. DOI: 10.1038/clpt.1987.123
  14. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 2016;15(2):155–163. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
  15. Urquhart O, Tampi MP, Pilcher L, et al. Nonrestorative treatments for caries: systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Dent Res 2018;98(1):14–26. DOI: 10.1177/0022034518800014
  16. Pretty IA, Maupomé G. A closer look at diagnosis in clinical dental practice: part 1. Reliability, validity, specificity and sensitivity of diagnostic procedures. J Can Dent Assoc 2004;70(4):251–255. PMID: 15120020.
  17. Bussaneli DG, Restrepo M, Boldieri T, et al. Proximal caries lesion detection in primary teeth: does this justify the association of diagnostic methods? Lasers Med Sci 2015;30(9):2239–2244. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-015-1798-2
  18. Park SH, Goo JM, Jo CH. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean J Radiol 2004;5(1):11–18. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2004.5.1.11
  19. Harrison R, Richardson D. Bitewing radiographs of children taken with and without a film-holding device. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 1989;18(3):97–99. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.18.3.2637884
  20. Klingberg G. Dental anxiety and behaviour management problems in paediatric dentistry — a review of background factors and diagnostics. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2008;9(S1):11–15. DOI: 10.1007/BF03262650
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.