1 / 15

Radiographic Recognition of Dental Implants as an Aid to Identifying the Deceased

Radiographic Recognition of Dental Implants as an Aid to Identifying the Deceased. Nattawut Rodchom No 51312310. Radiographic Recognition of Dental Implants as an Aid to Identifying the Deceased. Dental Implant. 1.Fixture 2.Abutment 3.Crown. Radiographic. review.

noe
Download Presentation

Radiographic Recognition of Dental Implants as an Aid to Identifying the Deceased

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Radiographic Recognition of Dental Implants as an Aid to Identifying the Deceased Nattawut Rodchom No 51312310

  2. Radiographic Recognition of Dental Implants as an Aid to Identifying the Deceased

  3. Dental Implant • 1.Fixture • 2.Abutment • 3.Crown

  4. Radiographic

  5. review • 1992 Sewerin = indentified the influence of various features of implant • 2006 Michelinakis = developed computer software to assist in the indentification of implant

  6. Material and Methods • Implant type • Radiograph film = Nikon 2000 camera (Tokyo,Japan) • Type of radiograph = mouth • 200 radiographimages

  7. Material and Methods • Implant Recognition System (IRS) • inter-examiner / intra-examiner • The McNemar’s test

  8. Result TABLE 1—Summary of the number of correct implant identificationradiographic images at each assessment. Examiner 1 Examiner 2 • First assessment without IRS 111 (55.5%) 77 (38.5%) • Second assessment without IRS 119 (59.5%) 80 (40%) • First assessment with IRS 131 (65.5%) 86 (43%) • Second assessment with IRS 123 (61.5%) 80 (40%)

  9. TABLE 2—McNemar’s tests results Test No. Test McNemar’s Statistic Freedom Pr > S Significance 1 EX1-IRS 2.0 1 0.16 NO 1st vs 2nd 2 EX1+IRS 3.6 1 0.06 NO 1st vs 2nd 3 EX2 –IRS 0.2 1 0.64 NO 1st vs 2nd 4 EX2 +IRS 1.1 1 0.30 NO 1st vs 2nd 5 EX1 –IRS+IRS 10.6 1 <0.0011 YES

  10. Result TABLE 2—McNemar’s tests results Test No. Test McNemar’s Statistic Freedom Pr > S Significance 6EX2-IRS+IRS1.2 1 0.27 NO 7 Total-IRS+IRS 9.0 1 <0.0027 YES 8 -IRS EX1 VS EX2 36.25 1 <0.0001 YES 9 +IRS EX1 VS EX2 58.7 1 <0.0001 YES 10 Total EX1 VS EX2 92.9 1 <0.0001 YES

  11. DISCUSSION • The sample of 200 implant images by Dentists and odontologists from 12 countries • 22 manufacturers • The most manufacturers Nobel-Biocare,Straumann,Branemark

  12. DISCUSSION • Differentiation intraoral and extraoral radiographs • assessed in a single day • Intra-Examiner = no significant • Inter-Examiner = significant • Implant Recognition System ( IRS )

  13. conciusion • Nonstandardized radiographs • Prior knowledge of each examiner • Modifications to the IRS

  14. สวัสดีครับ

More Related