World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 8 , ISSUE 1 ( January-February, 2017 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Factors determining Radiation Protection Practices among Indian General Dental Practitioners: An Explorative Study

Almas Binnal, Gururaghavendran Rajesh

Citation Information : Binnal A, Rajesh G. Factors determining Radiation Protection Practices among Indian General Dental Practitioners: An Explorative Study. World J Dent 2017; 8 (1):14-20.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1404

Published Online: 01-02-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction

Radiation exposure encountered in dentistry is minimal; however, their harmful effects cannot be ruled out. Though there are several guidelines established to minimize exposure to X-rays in dentistry, earlier studies have reported that practitioners are not entirely compliant with the same. There is, therefore, a definite need to identify factors that influence compliance with radiation protection practices among general dental practitioners (GDPs).

Objective

The objective is to assess various factors influencing radiation protection practices among Indian GDPs.

Materials and methods

A cross-sectional study design using a pretested, self-administered, structured questionnaire comprising of 37 items was employed in the present study. Information pertaining to demographics and radiation protection practices among GDPs was collected.

Results

A total of 66.7 and 49.4% did not follow position and distance rule respectively; overall, 88.5 and 94.3% did not use lead apron and thyroid collar respectively, for their patients. It was observed that 60.9% did not adjust exposure parameters according to tooth position; a total of 94.2% did not use personal dosimeters, while 63.2% disposed radiographic waste in common drain. Correlation analysis revealed significant association of awareness about governing bodies with educational course, distance rule with years of practice, personal dosimeter usage with gender, and other patients’ exposure to radiation with type of practice of the participants (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The present study revealed poor radiation protection practices among GDPs. Low compliance with personnel- and patient-related protection measures was observed. A majority of the respondents were not familiar with radiation protection guidelines. Correlation analysis revealed important demographics that were influencing radiation protection practices among the respondents. The present study highlights crucial policy implications to ensure greater compliance with appropriate radiation protection guidelines among GDPs in India.

How to cite this article

Binnal A, Rajesh G, Ahmed J, Denny C. Factors determining Radiation Protection Practices among Indian General Dental Practitioners: An Explorative Study. World J Dent 2017;8(1):14-20.


PDF Share
  1. Risks from dental radiation in 1995. J Calif Dent Assoc 1995 May;23(5):33-39.
  2. Assessment of radiation risk from dental radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1992 Aug;21(3):118-126.
  3. C.; Pharoah, M.J. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2009.
  4. Review article: radiation protection in dental radiology. Br J Radiol 1994 Nov;67(803):1041-1049.
  5. Comparative means of dose reduction in dental radiography. Curr Opin Dent 1992 Jun;2:1-9.
  6. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007;37(2-4):1-332.
  7. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement. NCRP report No. 145: new dental X-ray guidelines: their potential impact on your dental practice. Dent Today 2004 Sep;23(9):128-134.
  8. Survey of dental radiological practice in Turkey. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005 Jul;34(4):222-227.
  9. Insights into the state of radiation protection among a subpopulation of Indian dental practitioners. Imaging Sci Dent 2013 Dec;43(4):253-259.
  10. Survey of dental radiographical practice in states of Punjab and Haryana in India. J Investig Clin Dent 2014 Feb;5(1):72-77.
  11. Flemish general dental practitioners’ knowledge of dental radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010 Feb;39(2):113-118.
  12. Compliance of Iranian dentists with safety standards of oral radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012 Feb;41(2):159-164.
  13. Oral radiology safety standards adopted by the general dentists practicing in National Capital Region (NCR). J Clin Diagn Res 2016 Jan;10(1):ZC42-45.
  14. Attitude of the Korean dentists towards radiation safety and selection criteria. Imaging Sci Dent 2013 Sep;43(3):179-184.
  15. Radiation in dental practice: awareness, protection and recommendations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013 Jan;14(1):143-148.
  16. Attitude of the Belgian dentist population towards radiation protection. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004 Sep;33(5):334-339.
  17. Survey of dental radiographic services in private dental clinics in Damascus, Syria. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002 Mar;31(2):100-105.
  18. The use of radiation dose-reduction techniques in the practices of dental faculty members. J Dent Educ 2002 Jun;66(6):697-702.
  19. Status of occupational hazards and their prevention among dental professionals in Chandigarh, India; a comprehensive questionnaire. Dent Res J 2013 Jul-Aug;10(4):446-451.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.