ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Occupational radiation exposure from handheld dental x-ray devices: A quantitative dosimetric study.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Occupational radiation exposure from handheld dental x-ray devices: A quantitative dosimetric study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOccupational radiation exposure from handheld dental radiographic devices may pose potential health risks. This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the occupational radiation dose from handheld dental radiographic devices, UAX-01 (Device A), HyperLight-G (Device B), and EzRay Air P (Device C) to the operator's critical anatomical regions.
methodsAn experimental dosimetric study was conducted using purposive sampling of three devices. Radiation was measured using calibrated TLD-100 dosimeters placed on a mannequin (simulating an operator) and a head and neck phantom used only to simulate patient scatter. Dosimeters were placed at the orbital surface, neck (thyroid level), chest (thoracic level), index fingers, and pelvic surface (gonadal level) to measure personal dose equivalent [Hp(0.07), Hp(10)] with and without shielding. Additionally, in vivo clinical dose evaluation for device A over 2 months with dosimeters placed at the chest and finger level for dentist and assistant in Erbil, Kurdistan region of Iraq. Personal dose equivalent was analyzed using SPSS, with statistical significance set at p ≤ 0.05.
resultsThe results showed significant differences in unshielded personal dose equivalent across devices and anatomical regions (p ≤ 0.05). UAX-01 had the highest mean exposure at most sites: right orbital surface (46.90 µSv), neck (thyroid level) (39.54 µSv), chest (thoracic level) (40.66 µSv), right hand (65.21 µSv), left hand (31.85 µSv), and pelvic surface (gonadal level) (58.65 µSv). The left orbit received the highest dose from HyperLight-G (26.68 µSv). Protective shielding significantly reduced radiation exposure in nearly all regions and devices (p < 0.001), with reductions ranging from 32.25% to 66.90%. An exception was the chest (thoracic level) with HyperLight-G, where the reduction was not significant (p = 0.184). Additionally, in vivo monitoring of device A (UAX-01) over 2 months revealed a cumulative personal dose equivalent Hp(0.07) = 16.76 mSv to the finger (sensor-holding hand) and Hp(10) = 1.98 mSv to the chest of the dentist, indicating substantial localized exposure during routine clinical use.
conclusionThe study revealed that handheld dental x-ray devices-particularly the UAX-01-can expose operators to radiation levels that may exceed ICRP and NCRP occupational dose limits for the orbital surface, hands, and whole body when used without consistent protection. To mitigate these risks, health care providers should implement shielding, proper positioning, and sensor holders, while policymakers must enforce ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable)-based regulations and routine occupational dose monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.