Effect of Varying Displays and Room Illuminance on Caries Diagnostic Accuracy in Digital Dental Radiographs

In clinical practice, digital radiographs taken for caries diagnostics are viewed on varying types of displays and usually in relatively high ambient lighting (room illuminance) conditions. Our purpose was to assess the effect of room illuminance and varying display types on caries diagnostic accuracy in digital dental radiographs. Previous studies have shown that the diagnostic accuracy of caries detection is significantly better in reduced lighting conditions. Our hypothesis was that higher display luminance could compensate for this in higher ambient lighting conditions. Extracted human teeth with approximal surfaces clinically ranging from sound to demineralized were radiographed and evaluated by 3 observers who detected carious lesions on 3 different types of displays in 3 different room illuminance settings ranging from low illumination, i.e. what is recommended for diagnostic viewing, to higher illumination levels corresponding to those found in an average dental office. Sectioning and microscopy of the teeth validated the presence or absence of a carious lesion. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were calculated for each modality and observer. Differences were estimated by analyzing the binary data assuming the added effects of observer and modality in a generalized linear model. The observers obtained higher sensitivities in lower illuminance settings than in higher illuminance settings. However, this was related to a reduction in specificity, which meant that there was no significant difference in overall accuracy. Contrary to our hypothesis, there were no significant differences between the accuracy of different display types. Therefore, different displays and room illuminance levels did not affect the overall accuracy of radiographic caries detection.

[1]  A. Wenzel,et al.  The effect of aging on luminance of standard liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors. , 2011, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[2]  W. Jacquet,et al.  Detection of cavitated or non-cavitated approximal enamel caries lesions using CMOS and CCD digital X-ray sensors and conventional D and F-speed films at different exposure conditions. , 2011, American journal of dentistry.

[3]  M. Frydenberg,et al.  Effect of monitor display on detection of approximal caries lesions in digital radiographs. , 2009, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[4]  A. Petersson,et al.  Effect of monitors on approximal caries detection in digital radiographs--standard versus precalibrated DICOM part 14 displays: an in vitro study. , 2009, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[5]  A. Petersson,et al.  Digital radiography in general dental practice: a field study. , 2007, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[6]  G. Warfvinge,et al.  Effect of ambient light and monitor brightness and contrast settings on the detection of approximal caries in digital radiographs: an in vitro study. , 2007, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[7]  David J Manning,et al.  Ambient lighting: effect of illumination on soft-copy viewing of radiographs of the wrist. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[8]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: executive summary of AAPM TG18 report. , 2005, Medical physics.

[9]  M. Frydenberg,et al.  Influence of Number of Surfaces and Observers on Statistical Power in a Multiobserver ROC Radiographic Caries Detection Study , 2003, Caries Research.

[10]  S. Evans,et al.  Recommended Standards For The Routine Performance Testing of Diagnostic X-Ray Imaging Systems , 1998 .

[11]  M. Frydenberg,et al.  Task-specific enhancement filters in storage phosphor images from the Vistascan system for detection of proximal caries lesions of known size. , 2009, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[12]  R. Hämäläinen,et al.  STUK-- Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority , 2000 .