Influence of the battery level of a handheld X-ray device on the objective image quality of radiographs.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Laura Ricardina Ramirez-Sotelo, Débora Costa Ruiz, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Matheus L Oliveira, Deborah Queiroz Freitas, Francisco Haiter-Neto
{"title":"Influence of the battery level of a handheld X-ray device on the objective image quality of radiographs.","authors":"Laura Ricardina Ramirez-Sotelo, Débora Costa Ruiz, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Matheus L Oliveira, Deborah Queiroz Freitas, Francisco Haiter-Neto","doi":"10.1093/dmfr/twaf050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the influence of the battery level of a handheld X-ray device on the objective image quality of radiographs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An acrylic-block was radiographed using a SnapShot solid-state sensor and an Eagle handheld X-ray device set at 60 kVp and 0.88 mAs, with the battery at ten different levels (ranging from fully charged to 10%). Six radiographs were acquired at each level. Mean grey values and standard deviations were collected using ImageJ software to assess image brightness, noise, and uniformity. Additionally, an aluminium step-wedge was radiographed under the same conditions for contrast evaluation. Image quality parameters were compared across different battery levels using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey's post-hoc test (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Images obtained with a 100% battery level showed higher brightness than those at 50% (P < 0.0001); the battery level did not affect image noise (P = 0.091); uniformity at 20% battery level differed from all other levels (P < 0.0001); and contrast was highest at 90% battery compared to all other levels (P < 0.0001). Overall, the values remained consistent across different battery levels.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite some significant differences, the objective image quality remained stable throughout the entire battery charge cycle of the tested handheld X-ray device.</p>","PeriodicalId":11261,"journal":{"name":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","volume":" ","pages":"37-42"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twaf050","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the influence of the battery level of a handheld X-ray device on the objective image quality of radiographs.

Methods: An acrylic-block was radiographed using a SnapShot solid-state sensor and an Eagle handheld X-ray device set at 60 kVp and 0.88 mAs, with the battery at ten different levels (ranging from fully charged to 10%). Six radiographs were acquired at each level. Mean grey values and standard deviations were collected using ImageJ software to assess image brightness, noise, and uniformity. Additionally, an aluminium step-wedge was radiographed under the same conditions for contrast evaluation. Image quality parameters were compared across different battery levels using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey's post-hoc test (α = 0.05).

Results: Images obtained with a 100% battery level showed higher brightness than those at 50% (P < 0.0001); the battery level did not affect image noise (P = 0.091); uniformity at 20% battery level differed from all other levels (P < 0.0001); and contrast was highest at 90% battery compared to all other levels (P < 0.0001). Overall, the values remained consistent across different battery levels.

Conclusions: Despite some significant differences, the objective image quality remained stable throughout the entire battery charge cycle of the tested handheld X-ray device.

手持x光机电池电量对x光片客观成像质量的影响。
目的:评价手持x光机电池电量对x光片客观成像质量的影响。方法:使用SnapShot固态传感器和Eagle手持式x光设备,在60 kVp和0.88 ma的条件下对丙烯酸块进行x光拍摄,电池处于10个不同的水平(从充满电到10%)。每个节段拍摄6张x线片。使用ImageJ软件收集平均灰度值和标准差以评估图像亮度、噪声和均匀性。此外,在相同条件下对铝制阶梯楔进行x线摄影以评估对比度。采用方差分析(ANOVA)和Tukey’s事后检验(α = 0.05)比较不同电池水平下的图像质量参数。结果:电池电量为100%时获得的图像亮度高于电池电量为50%时获得的图像亮度(p)。结论:尽管存在一些显著差异,但在所测试的手持x射线设备的整个电池充电周期中,客观图像质量保持稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
65
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (DMFR) is the journal of the International Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (IADMFR) and covers the closely related fields of oral radiology and head and neck imaging. Established in 1972, DMFR is a key resource keeping dentists, radiologists and clinicians and scientists with an interest in Head and Neck imaging abreast of important research and developments in oral and maxillofacial radiology. The DMFR editorial board features a panel of international experts including Editor-in-Chief Professor Ralf Schulze. Our editorial board provide their expertise and guidance in shaping the content and direction of the journal. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor - 1.919 - Receipt to first decision - average of 3 weeks - Acceptance to online publication - average of 3 weeks - Open access option - ISSN: 0250-832X - eISSN: 1476-542X
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书