Oral and maxillofacial radiology Online only article| Volume 121, ISSUE 5, e129-e137, May 2016

Comparison of the performance of intraoral X-ray sensors using objective image quality assessment

Published:February 12, 2016DOI:


      The main aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of 10 individual sensors of the same make, using objective measures of key image quality parameters. A further aim was to compare 8 brands of sensors.

      Study Design

      Ten new sensors of 8 different models from 6 manufacturers (i.e., 80 sensors) were included in the study. All sensors were exposed in a standardized way using an X-ray tube voltage of 60 kVp and different exposure times. Sensor response, noise, low-contrast resolution, spatial resolution and uniformity were measured.


      Individual differences between sensors of the same brand were surprisingly large in some cases. There were clear differences in the characteristics of the different brands of sensors. The largest variations were found for individual sensor response for some of the brands studied. Also, noise level and low contrast resolution showed large variations between brands.


      Sensors, even of the same brand, vary significantly in their quality. It is thus valuable to establish action levels for the acceptance of newly delivered sensors and to use objective image quality control for commissioning purposes and periodic checks to ensure high performance of individual digital sensors.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


        • Wenzel A.
        Digital radiography and caries diagnosis.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1998; 27 (Review): 3-11
        • Hintze H.
        • Wenzel A.
        • Jones C.
        In vitro comparison of D- and E-speed film radiography, RVG and Visualix digital radiography for the detection of enamel approximal and dentinal occlusal caries lesions.
        Caries Res. 1994; 28: 363-367
        • Syriopoulos K.
        • Sanderink G.C.
        • Velders X.L.
        • van der Stelt P.F.
        Radiographic detection of approximal caries: a comparison of dental films and digital imaging systems.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000; 29: 312-318
        • Paurazas S.B.
        • Geist J.R.
        • Pink F.E.
        • Hoen M.M.
        • Steiman H.R.
        Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of digital imaging by using CCD and CMOS-APS sensors with E-speed film in the detection of periapical bony lesions.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000; 89: 356-362
        • Hellén-Halme K.
        • Petersson A.
        • Warfvinge G.
        • Nilsson M.
        Effect of ambient light and monitor brightness and contrast settings on the detection of approximal caries in digital radiographs. An in vitro study.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008; 37: 380-384
        • Hellén-Halme K.
        • Nilsson M.
        • Petersson A.
        Effect of monitors on approximal caries detection in digital radiographs-standard versus precalibrated DICOM part 14 displays: an in vitro study.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009; 107: 716-720
        • Butt A.
        • Mahoney M.
        • Savage N.W.
        The impact of computer display performance on the quality of digital radiographs: a review.
        Aust Dent J. 2012; 57: 16-23
        • Hellén-Halme K.
        Effect of two X-ray tube voltages on detection of approximal caries in digital radiographs. An in vitro study.
        Clin Oral Investig. 2011; 15: 209-213
        • Hellén-Halme K.
        • Rohlin M.
        • Petersson A.
        Digital radiography in general dental practice: a field study.
        Swed Dent J. 2005; 29: 81-87
        • Abesi F.
        • Mirshekar A.
        • Moudi E.
        • et al.
        Diagnostic accuracy of digital and conventional radiography in the detection of non-cavitated approximal dental caries.
        Iran J Radiol. 2012; 9: 17-21
        • Udupa H.
        • Mah P.
        • Dove S.B.
        • McDavid W.D.
        Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013; 116: 774-783
        • Farman A.G.
        • Farman T.T.
        A comparison of 18 different x-ray detectors currently used in dentistry.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005; 99: 485-489
        • Rose A.
        Television camera tubes and the problem of vision.
        in: Advances in Electronics and Electron Physics. Vol 1. Academic Press, New York, NY1948: 131-166
        • Rose A.
        Quantum effects in human vision.
        in: Advances in Biological and Medical Physics. Vol 5. Academic Press, New York, NY1957: 211-242
        • Rose A.
        Vision: Human and Electronic.
        Plenum Press, New York, NY1973
        • Burgess A.E.
        The Rose model, revisited.
        J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 1999; 16: 633-646
        • Bushberg J.T.
        • Seibert J.A.
        • Leidholdt Jr., E.M.
        • Boone J.M.
        The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging.
        Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA2002: 287
      1. Swedish Radiation Safety Authority recommendations on performance specifications for equipment used in diagnostic radiology [in Swedish]. SSMFS 2008:42.

        • Derpanis K.G.
        Fourier transform of the Gaussian.
        2005 (Available at:) (Accessed November 9, 2015)
      2. Rasband WS. ImageJ. U.S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, 1997-2012. Available at: Http:// Accessed November 9, 2015.

        • Gröndahl H.G.
        Radiographic caries diagnosis. A study of caries progression and observer performance.
        Swed Dent J Suppl. 1979; 3: 1-32
        • Agbaje J.O.
        • Mutsvari T.
        • Lesaffre E.
        • Declerck D.
        Examiner performance in calibration exercises compared with field conditions when scoring caries experience.
        Clin Oral Investig. 2012; 16: 481-488
        • International Commission on Radiological Protection
        Managing patient dose in digital radiology. ICRP report 73.
        Ann ICRP. 2004; 34: 1-73

      Linked Article