X-RADIATION IN DENTAL OFFICES IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA. II. DARKROOM FACILITIES AND PROCESSING TECHNIQUES

Journal Article · Sun Dec 01 04:00:00 EST 1963 · Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology (U.S.)

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(63)90381-5· OSTI ID:4055726

Wuehrmann, A H; Jamison, H C; Manson-Hing, L R

Although most users of ionizing radiation are constantly being subjected to increasing amounts of legislation designed to protect the public from excessive exposure, thus far, regulatory measures relating to dentistry have been concerned with barrier materials and use of protective leaded aprons for patients. No effort has been made to establish laws or regulations where professional judgment is required, and dentists are not restricted as to the number of exposures they may make or the speed of the film emulsion they must use. No individual or agency inspects the quality of the finished film or evaluates the individual practitioner's ability to interpret accurately the resultant roentgenogram; the dentist is simply expected to avoid needless, useless, or wasteful exposure of his patients. To assess the need for improved x-ray film development techniques, which would result in decreased patient exposure, a survey was made in 195 dentists' offices. Only 25 darkrooms examined had no apparent light leaks. There was no safelight in 7 darkrooms, and safelights were judged inadequate in 67 and adequate in 117 darkrooms. A solution thermometer was available in 106 of the 195 darkrooms. In 168 offices, film processing was done on a time-temperature basis (ordinarily 5 min development at 65 deg F or 41/ 2 min at 68 deg ). A solution-replenishing system was used in 23 darkrooms. The darkroom was also evaluated in its general appearance, tidiness, and arrangement on a subjective scale. Twenty-six darkrooms were rated good, 105 fair, and 60 poor. Twenty-seven of the offices reported that a sight developing technique was used, compared with 168 using a time-temperature technique. The time-temperature procedure did not follow manufacturer's directions in many of the offices because of the absence of solution thermometers and temperature-regulating equipment. A stop bath was used in only three offices. The interval of rinsing between developing and fixing of film ranged from no rinsing to 90 sec. The time intervals during which films were fixed ranged from 2 min to 2 hr. The inadequacy of many of the darkroom techniques is discussed and recommendations are made for improvements designed to reduce duration and repetition of x-ray exposures of patients. Nonoptimal film quality results in unnecessary patient exposure (BBB)

• Research Organization: Univ. of Alabama, Birmingham
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE
• NSA Number: NSA-18-016247
• OSTI ID: 4055726
• Journal Information: Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology (U.S.), Journal Name: Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology (U.S.) Vol. Vol: 16; ISSN OSOMA
• Country of Publication: Country unknown/Code not available
• Language: English

Related Subjects

BARRIERS
BONES
DENTISTRY
FILMS
HEALTH AND SAFETY
IONIZATION
IRRADIATION
LEAD
MEDICINE
NUCLEAR EMULSIONS
PERSONNEL
RADIATION DOSES
RADIATION PROTECTION
RADIATION SOURCES
RADIOGRAPHY
ROENTGENOGRAMS
SAFETY
TEETH
THERMOMETERS
X RADIATION