Investigation of inter‐ and intra‐rater reliability using digital dental software for prosthodontics crown preparations

Evaluating the effectiveness of a novel digital evaluation technology on dental preclinical crown preparation training

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the assessment scores of a novel digital training program versus traditional training in dental preclinical crown preparation.

METHODS

Crown preparations in two consecutive preclinical training sessions were retrospectively collected and assigned to three groups: traditional group (TG), scanning group (SG), and digital evaluation group (DG). Students in the TG (n = 20) were taught by conventional visual grading, while students in the SG (n = 25) received three-dimensional feedback from digitally scanned preparations. All the SG students continued with supplementary digital evaluation and preparations were allocated into the DG (n = 25). Comparison of total scores between groups was investigated using independent samples t-test and paired samples t-test. Mann‒Whitney U-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to statistically analyze the differences in subdividing categories. The level of significance was p < 0.05. Questionnaires on the digital evaluation procedure were answered by students in DG.

RESULTS

The results showed a significant improvement (p < 0.01) in the total scores of DG than those of TG and SG, while there were no statistically significant differences between TG and SG. Scores of surface finish and undercut improved significantly in DG compared to TG and SG. The reduction scores of DG were significantly higher than those of SG. Students' feedback indicated a positive perspective on the implementation of the novel digital evaluation technology.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that digital evaluation technology is useful for preclinical crown preparation training. Attention should also be paid to studying the optimal integration of digital dentistry into traditional dental curricula and its effects on students' learning curves.

Automated scoring and augmented reality visualization software program for evaluating tooth preparations

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Tooth preparation is an essential part of prosthetic dentistry; however, traditional evaluation methods involve subjective visual inspection that is prone to examiner variability.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate a newly developed automated scoring and augmented reality (ASAR) visualization software program for evaluating tooth preparations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 122 tooth models (61 anterior and 61 posterior teeth) prepared by dental students were evaluated by using visual assessments that were conducted by students and an expert, and auto assessment that was performed with an ASAR software program by using a 3-dimensional (3D) point-cloud comparison method. The software program offered comprehensive functions, including generating detailed reports for individual test models, producing a simultaneous summary score report for all tested models, creating 3D color-coded deviation maps, and forming augmented reality quick-response (AR-QR) codes for online data storage with AR visualization. The reliability and efficiency of the evaluation methods were measured by comparing tooth preparation assessment scores and evaluation time. The data underwent statistical analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by Mann-Whitney U tests for pairwise comparisons adjusted with the Benjamini-Hochberg method (α=.05).

RESULTS

Significant differences were found across the evaluation methods and tooth types in terms of preparation scores and evaluation time (P<.001). A significant difference was observed between the auto- and student self-assessment methods (P<.001) in scoring both the anterior and posterior tooth preparations. However, no significant difference was found between the auto- and expert-assessment methods for the anterior (P=.085) or posterior (P=.14) tooth preparation scores. Notably, the auto-assessment method required significantly shorter time than the expert- and self-assessment methods (P<.001) for both tooth types. Additionally, significant differences in evaluation time between the anterior and posterior tooth were observed in both self- and expert-assessment methods (P<.001), whereas the evaluation times for both the tooth types with the auto-assessment method were statistically similar (P=.32).

CONCLUSIONS

ASAR-based evaluation is comparable with expert-assessment while exhibiting significantly higher time efficiency. Moreover, AR-QR codes enhance learning and training experiences by facilitating online data storage and AR visualization.

Study of the use in autonomy of intraoral scanning systems to optimise dental students' performances in fixed prosthodontics practical learning in second year

AIM

The purpose of this study was to evaluate if the use of intraoral scanner analysis could help students to optimise their performance and their self-assessment abilities in prosthetic preparation without the teacher's assistance in the preclinical course.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-five second-year dental students were randomly divided into three groups: Control group (C), CeRec group (CR) and PrepCheck group (PC). Group C only use silicon keys to control the preparation thickness. The students in Group CR analysed their work with Cerec™ software. The Group PC use a pedagogic software (PrepCheck™) which allowed comparison with the "master" preparation. They used control tools preparations for three consecutive training sessions. Then a final assessment session without control tool to evaluate their performance was organised. All preparations were objectively evaluated thanks to stl. analysis software (Geomagic® Control X). Each preparation was compared with the master preparation by defining tolerance ranges. An objective overall score out of 20 was assigned to each preparation according to their degree of correspondence. In addition, a questionnaire was performed to analyse the students' perceptions regarding the use of intraoral camera.

RESULTS

During the assessment session, no significant difference was revealed between the different groups with respect to the students' performance. The comparative analysis between the self-assessment scores and the objective scores using Geomagic® software showed that digital control tools did not help the student to improve their self-assessment abilities without the teacher's assistance.

CONCLUSIONS

The intraoral cameras and specific pedagogic software in autonomy could not improve students' performance for teeth preparation and self-assessment abilities in second year. These digital tools facilitate objective feedback on preparation defects, but constructive criticism needs human reflection. The teacher's opinions and advice remain essential to develop their students' performance and self-assessment skills. The use of digital tools must be integrated in dentistry course to develop the interpret of the results and optimise feedback.

Evaluation on a teaching software for removable partial denture framework design

BACKGROUND

Removable partial dentures (RPDs) are widely used as a dental prosthesis and have a wide application scope.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of using design software in the preclinical teaching of removable partial dentures (RPDs).

METHODS

Unreal Engine software was used to build the RPD framework design teaching and training software. All 131 undergraduate students majoring in stomatology in the class of 2018, Kunming Medical University, were randomly divided into three groups and received either traditional experiment teaching, flipped classroom teaching, or software teaching for RPD design. The application effect of the software in the preclinical teaching of RPD design was evaluated by analyzing the examination results and through the use of a questionnaire survey.

RESULTS

The differences in the theoretical examination scores among the traditional teaching group, the flipped classroom group, and the software teaching group were not statistically significant (P> 0.05), while the average design scores of upper Kennedy Class I and lower Kennedy Class II subclass II in the software teaching group were significantly higher than those in the traditional teaching group (P< 0.05). Overall, 75% of the students in the software teaching group reported that this teaching method could improve their learning initiative, a higher percentage than in the traditional teaching group (55.8%, P< 0.05). Meanwhile, 90.9% of the students in the software teaching group reported that the software could make RPD-related theoretical knowledge more visual and intuitive, and 93.2% of these students felt it was helpful for understanding the RPD three-dimensional (3D) spatial structure. These percentages were higher than those in the traditional teaching and flipped classroom groups (P< 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In the preclinical teaching of RPD design, software training helped the students better understand the 3D structure of RPDs and establish clear design ideas, and it may also be valuable for in-depth research and promotion purposes.

3D Digital technology as an alternative educational tool in preclinical dentistry

INTRODUCTION

The advancement of 3D digital scanners has allowed educators to uphold the quality of education whilst implementing novel methods of assessment.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare two evaluation methods, conventional and digital scanned assessments, on student cavity preparations and students and faculty's perceptions of these assessment methods.

METHODS

Predoctoral students performed Class II amalgam and Class III resin composite preparations on simulated teeth for their preclinical competency examinations. Two calibrated faculty evaluated the students' preparations using dental instruments for conventional assessments and 3D scanned images for digital assessments. Faculty scores from both assessment methods were compared and statistically analysed (p < .05). Students also self-assessed their performance using the digital scanned images and filled out a perception survey.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the conventional (Class II; 73.3 ± 12.2 and Class III; 82.5 ± 8.9) and the digital assessment with scanned images (Class II; 71.3 ± 11.0 and Class III; 82.2 ± 8.2). Faculty scores from both methods have shown a trend of comparability. Most students agreed that digital ideal preparation models were useful (84.2%) and almost all students agreed that digital technology helped them learn operative dentistry (91.1%). In contrast, most students agreed that conventional assessment should be the main self-evaluation system (82.2%) and disagreed that digital assessment is more effective than conventional self-assessment (68.3%).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that 3D digital technology could be an alternative and/or supplementary educational tool to aid in upholding the quality of dental education.

Reliability of software-based assessment of paediatric preparations for preformed metal crowns in the simulation laboratory

PURPOSE

Using software for assessment of restorative work on typodonts in the simulation laboratory may enhance the objective evaluation of student work. The study aimed to evaluate the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability using 3-D scans from the Planmeca Emerald™ intra-oral scanner with Romexis Compare^® software for assessing preparations for preformed metal crowns (PMCs).

METHODS

Three operators independently recorded 3-D scans and digitally measured the features of 30 PMC preparations on typodont primary teeth (# 75). Using Romexis Compare^® software, preparations were measured from mesial, distal and occlusal aspects. Measurements were repeated after 2 weeks. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to measure the reliability of measurements between operators and within the one operator.

RESULTS

For measuring the extent of tooth reduction, there was excellent intra-rater reliability for each operator (ICC 0.96-0.99). The highest inter-rater reliability was for measurements of the occlusal surface (0.946 and 0.956), followed by the mesial surface (0.852 and 0.862) and then the distal surface (0.746 and 0.724).

CONCLUSION

This method was useful and reliable for measuring features of PMC preparation, but with some limitations. Improving the software to provide specific assistance tools would empower greater uptake of this method as an adjunct to traditional visual grading tool in paediatric dentistry preclinical teaching.