Influence of lead apron shielding on absorbed doses from panoramic radiography

D. Rottke, L. Grossekettler, K. Sawada, P. Poxleitner, D. Schulze

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

18 Citations (Scopus)


Objectives: This study investigated the absorbed doses in a full anthropomorphic body phantom from two different panoramic radiography devices, performing protocols with and without applying a lead apron. Methods: A RANDO® full body phantom (Alderson Research Laboratories Inc., Stamford, CT) was equipped with 110 thermoluminescent dosemeters at 55 different sites and set up in two different panoramic radiography devices [SCANORA® three-dimensional (3D) (SOREDEX, Tuusula, Finland) and ProMax® 3D (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland)] and exposed. Two different protocols were performed in the two devices. The first protocol was performed without any lead shielding, whereas the phantom was equipped with a standard adult lead apron for the second protocol. Results: A two-tailed paired samples t-test for the SCANORA 3D revealed that there is no difference between the protocol using lead apron shielding (m587.99, s5102.98) and the protocol without shielding (m=87.34, s=107.49), t(54)=20.313,p. >0.05. The same test for the ProMax 3D showed that there is also no difference between the protocol using shielding (m=106.48, s=117.38) and the protocol without shielding (m=107.75, s=114,36), t(54)=0.938, p.>0.05. Conclusions: In conclusion, the results of this study showed no statistically significant differences between a panoramic radiography with or without the use of lead apron shielding.

Original languageEnglish
Article number20130302
JournalDentomaxillofacial Radiology
Issue number10
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2013


  • Dentistry
  • Panoramic
  • Radiation protection
  • Radiography
  • Thermoluminescent dosimetry


Dive into the research topics of 'Influence of lead apron shielding on absorbed doses from panoramic radiography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this