When we asked dentists if they use use digital x-rays, 66% said yes. Only 34% reported that they still use film.
“Digital x-rays have improved dentistry so much. I can’t imagine going back to the old way of developing x-rays. It has allowed doctors to diagnose a patient when they are away from the office,” said one periodontist.
“Couldn’t live without digital,” offered another.
A great investment –
“Possibly the best investment I have made in my practice.” (Kentucky dentist)
“One of my best purchases. I’ve been digital over 4 years.” (Florida dentist)
“We implemented digital about a decade ago and would never go back.” (South Carolina dentist)
“One of the most cost-effective things I’ve done. I have been digital since 2000.” (California dentist)
“Yes, who in this day and age doesn’t? It is SO inexpensive compared to what I paid over 10 years ago to do it, that it is a “no-brainer” to do. PLUS the savings in chemicals, processor maintenance, employee time to do these non-essential weekly maintenance jobs, making duplicates for Insurance etc. just makes going digital a “slam dunk” decision! This is why, once I purchased it, I realized these benefits and then lectured on going digital.” (Illinois dentist)
“It’s wonderful! Less radiation the patient and staff is exposed to and the ability to manipulate the images.” (Florida hygienist)
“Higher diagnosable image versus film, no fixer, developer, film, mounts cost, lower patient and ambient radiation levels — truly a no-brainer!” (North Dakota dentist)
Too expensive for some –
“Very expensive to fully implement.” (Missouri dentist)
“Digital has improved greatly, but I am not interested in the investment at this late stage of practice.” (Indiana dentist)
“I would love to have a digital pan/ceph, but at $44K, I’ll have to pass for now.” (Oklahoma dentist)
“Too expensive!” (Nevada dentist)
“I am 67 years old in a month or so and it is hard to spend that much money.” (California dentist)
“Way too costly!” (Massachusetts dentist)
Sensors can be an issue –
“Sensors are too @#*&! expensive!” (Mississippi dentist)
“The technology finally meets or exceeds the quality of film radiology — but with some drawbacks. The cost for the sensors and viewing equipment is very high, compared to the same film-based radiology. The bitewing views are not fully closed-mouth as bitewings done with films, because of the sensor cords. And the sensors have some limitations of placement freedom due to their rigidity and thickness compared to the relative patient comfort with films.” (California dentist)
“Since no sensor has been declared superior, I believe buyers need to evaluate the software. How many ‘clicks’ needed to go through the fmx, to modify contrast/brightness for diagnosing and making notes? You should be able to do this quickly ‘on the fly’ as the patient hears you review their x-rays. The right-click menu and simple keyboard shortcuts should be available so you don’t have to mouse all over the place for everything. I also believe software using the “template” paradigm of x-ray sets is a throwback to the past and is not good use of computer power.” (Illinois dentist)
“They have to make the sensors either less expensive or more durable.” (California dentist)