ORAL HEALTH EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE PROGRAM
 |
| Title |
No Significant Difference Is Noted in Posterior Proximal Surface Caries Detection for Extraoral Bitewing Radiographs vs. Intraoral Bitewing Radiographs |
| Clinical Question |
In patients needing bitewing radiographs for caries detection, are bitewings from panoramic radiograph machines a viable alternative to traditional intraoral bitewings? |
| Clinical Bottom Line |
No significant difference is noted in posterior proximal surface caries detection between extraoral bitewing radiographs and intraoral bitewing radiographs. This conclusion is based on an observational comparative study of 20 patients requiring bitewing radiographs with at least one carious surface. The Planmeca Promax panoramic machine was the only machine tested for extraoral bitewing radiographs; other machines have this setting but were not tested in this study. |
| Best Evidence |
(you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link) |
| PubMed ID |
Author / Year |
Patient Group |
Study type
(level of evidence) |
| #1) 26869221 | Terry/2016 | 20 patients requiring bitewing and panoramic radiographs | Gold standard-controlled diagnostic study | | Key results | “The overall intraoral vs extraoral panoramic BW ROC [receiver operating characteristic] area under the curve means of 0.832 and 0.827, respectively, were not significant at p = 0.7781. These results demonstrate that while there were significant differences in the mean ROC curves between and within the individual observers there was no overall difference between the intraoral BWs and extraoral panoramic BWs for the detection of interproximal carious lesions at all depths including incipient lesions.” | |
| Evidence Search |
Extraoral bitewing AND intraoral bitewing AND panoramic bitewing |
Comments on
The Evidence |
This evidence was notable because it gave an unbiased observation from multiple observers, and all subjects had a direct comparison of the experimental modality (extraoral BWs) to the gold standard (intraoral BWs). The evidence showed no major notable difference of the data sets between the gold standard of intraoral bitewings and comparison panoramic bitewings. |
| Applicability |
For patients needing diagnostic screening radiographs, the extra-oral bitewing feature is a valid tool for simplifying, expediting and reducing material cost for dental offices. |
| Specialty/Discipline |
(Oral Medicine/Pathology/Radiology) (General Dentistry) |
| Keywords |
Panoramic; Bitewing; Extraoral
|
| ID# |
3519 |
| Date of submission: |
12/05/2022 |
| E-mail |
rossbj@livemail.uthscsa.edu |
| Author |
Brian Ross |
| Co-author(s) |
Shireen Khan |
| Co-author(s) e-mail |
khans7@uthscsa.edu |
| Faculty mentor/Co-author |
Hassem Geha |
| Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail |
Geha@uthscsa.edu |
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?) |
post a rationale |
| None available | |
|
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS', FACULTY, RESIDENTS and/or STUDENTS COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs) |
post a comment |
| None available | |
|
|
