CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION 5

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
5.1 INTRODUCTION
This research study is conducted to evaluate the level of knowledge and radiation protection awareness on Dental Radiology among MAHSA University Final Year Dentistry students, the results that was analyzed in chapter four will be further interpreted in this chapter. Therefore, in this chapter the results of the study was discussed in relation to the objectives and some comparisons were regarding with similar studies conducted in various places.
5.2 INTERPRETATION ON PARTICIPANTS’ DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
This study includes 63% of female students and 36.9% male students, whereby female students are more than male students. Among these 65 participants, majority of students age ranged from 20 to 25 years old.
5.3 KNOWLEDGE OF DENTAL RADIOLOGY
While assessing the knowledge, the participants were asked whether they think that during examination the x-ray operator must protect himself from the reflected rays. Slightly more than half 61.6% of respondents agreed that x-ray operator must protect himself from reflected rays and a good number 30.8% of respondents disagreed and thought they don’t have to protect themselves from reflected rays, these result shows overall positive knowledge towards research. In comparison with Swapna, et al., (2017) showed that majority of students had the knowledge of harmful effects of dental radiation and they agreed that utmost care should be taken while handling diagnostic imaging in dental setup. Where some of students agreed that x-ray cannot be reflected.

According a survey done by brown (2017) stated that as the length of time a tech is exposed increase, the dose received increases in direct proportion. The further a person is from the source the less the radiation source is, when the distance from the source is doubled the intensity at the new distance is only ¼ the original intensity. Majority of participants, 40% students were disagreed that it takes 5 seconds after an exposure for scatter radiation to dissipated. In the meantime, 35.4% of respondents took a neutral position they neither agree nor disagree. Surprisingly, a significant minority 24.6% of respondents portrayed positive respond.
The study done by Byung-Do Lee, (2013) showed that bitewing radiography is well known for high detectability of interproximal caries and is also useful for evaluating the periodontal condition and dental decay. According the results of his research showed 60% of respondents were aware of value and recommended frequency of bitewing radiographs. The majority of the students in this research 66.2% who participate in this study showed that they have knowledge of the use of bitewing radiographs.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The results of this study shows that only 47.7% of respondents know that panoramic radiographs are not indicated to investigate incipient caries lesion, this shows that the knowledge gap about panoramic radiographs. Several research were done regarding panoramic radiographs use and there was evidence that the panoramic radiograph is not an effective method of approximal caries diagnosis and lesions located in anterior teeth are poorly demonstrated on panoramic films Molander B, (1993) the panoramic radiographs has been shown to be inferior to periapical and bitewing radiographs in the detection of approximal caries. (Horner, 1996)
When considering localization, a palatal position, most of students 40.0% has no idea using the Clark method. But the fact is the proper localization of unerupted canine plays a crucial role, it can help to recognize the tooth displacement in mixed dentition to prevent subsequent impaction. This statement was emphasized by the author Surubhi kumar, (2015) from the result of this research study, dentistry final year students 52.3% were uncertain about it, which seems they have moderate knowledge when it comes localization of palatal position.
Ameloblastoma are benign epithelial neoplasms and represent about 10% of odontogenic tumors. Robert J. Scholl, (1999) ameloblastoma can vary in their radiographic appearance, some appear as well defined, unilocular, well-corticated, lucent lesion and also multilocular with internal septa and a honey comb appearance, VJ.,( 1990) a satisfactory number (52.3%) of the respondents answered neutral on the question about multilocular ameloblastoma has aground-glass appearance, whereby only 20% of respondents answered disagree. Similarly, only 48.5% of informants were agreed on the question that asked about “tooth displacement and bone expansion are typical of malignant lesion”. Jin-hyeok lee, (2014) as lesions grow, large lesions may cause cortical bone expansion, loss of bony continuity bone and root resorption of tooth. The fact that cortical bone expansion and loss of bony continuity are greater in odontogenic kerotocyst. This means that more than half of the respondents don’t know the main idea about odontogenic cystic lesions. These results may have arisen the technique/interpretation domain needs to be reinforced throughout the course. As de-azevedo-vaz, et al., (2013) concluded in the study regarding undergraduates’ knowledge of oral radiology as he; suggested that an active learner centered methodology be introduced in evaluated school in order to improve students.

5.4 RADIATION PROTECTION AWARENESS OF DENTAL RADIOLOGY
Participants’ knowledge on radiation protection awareness was general assessed. This was to determine the level of knowledge of Dentistry Final year students in MAHSA University, based on the findings in this study, majority of the students 74% were agreed on question about protecting gonads from radiation is not necessary because dental radiographs are taken in the head and neck region. This study is in consistent with a study conducted by Tsapaki, (2017 ) in Greece where 50.3% of students agreed that protecting gonads from radiation is not necessary, while 20.7% were uncertain about it. As the European guidelines report that there is no need to apply gonadal shielding and also UK guidance notes state that routine use of lead aprons in dental radiography is not justified. Based on Seckinger, (1997) explanation about the biological effects and said that; during past decade scientific knowledge of somatic effects of radiation has increased substantially and it is now evident that certain transient somatic effects can be induced by relatively low doses of radiation; an evaluation study done by Silverstrim KJ, (2015) about knowledge of dental students stated that most of students were moderately have knowledge about radioprotection rules, thus chances of getting somatic effects. This study result show that half 52.3% of students were choose neutral regards the question of the minimal chance of somatic effect that x-ray operators can get if they correctly adopt the radioprotective rules. This shows that the students has moderate knowledge about somatic effects.
I?lgu¨y, ; Bay?rl?, (2005) carried out a study to determine the knowledge of dentists and dental students on radiation protection and quality of dental radiographic and they found that a considerable number of dental students in Turkey had knowledge of protective barriers and about, 36%–60% were know that the lead walls are essential to ensure adequate protection for the operator. In this research study, most of students (52.4%) agreed that barriers like lead walls are mandatory to ensure adequate protection for the operator. Lead walls are protective barriers because they are designed to protect individuals located outside the x-ray rooms from unwanted radiation.
The findings in this research study revealed that 53.8% of the students were unsure that an adequate maintenance of machine results in better protection and productive for both operator and patient. Conversely, 44.7% of the student were on the opinion that the adequate maintenance of x-ray machine results better productivity and protection. Similar to the present study Sutton D G,( 2012) found a significant number of students (37.8%) were unsure about adequate maintenance of x-ray machine.
According to Kavita Madan, (2015) young children usually experience difficulty while taking a radiograph. In such cases, it becomes necessary to take parental help in which the parent is asked to hold film or to hold both the child as well as the film. Majority of the students 60% who participate in this study agreed that parents should hold films in children’s mouth if they do not cooperate during examination.
5.5 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the current study findings revealed that most of the students had moderate knowledge with the mean score of (0.5213) 52.13% and standard deviation of 12.33 which reflect the knowledge of dental radiology. With favourable awareness of (0.5010) 50.10% and standard deviation of 9.968 towards radiation protection awareness of dental radiology.