Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 4 (5), 189-195
eCollection

Comparing Feedback From Faculty Interactions and Virtual Assessment Software in the Development of Psychomotor Skills in Preclinical Fixed Prosthodontics

Affiliations

Comparing Feedback From Faculty Interactions and Virtual Assessment Software in the Development of Psychomotor Skills in Preclinical Fixed Prosthodontics

Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh et al. Clin Exp Dent Res.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of virtual assessment software as a means of immediate feedback for preclinical fixed prosthodontics course. The subjects of the study were second year dental students with no previous training in fixed prosthodontics. Nine students participated in the study. Participants completed 2 days of didactic training focused on the principles of tooth preparation and the use of intraoral scanners and virtual assessment software. Didactic training was followed by 12 sessions of practical exercises. Students were randomly assigned to one of three groups for training in the preparation of tooth no. 46 for a complete cast crown. Students received feedback from (a) faculty interaction only; (b) interactions with both faculty and virtual assessment software; or (c) interactions with only virtual assessment software. During Sessions 5, 10, and 12, students prepared tooth no. 46 for complete cast crown independently and without any immediate feedback to simulate a practical exam. Prepared teeth were collected at Sessions 5, 10, and 12, and two blinded faculty members assessed the teeth following an established rubric. Results from Session 12 showed that preparations that one of three students and two of three students respectively for student-faculty interaction and student-faculty-Compare software interaction groups did not meet acceptable standards. However, the students in student-Compare software interaction group generated acceptable preparations at week 12. These data suggest that immediate feedback via virtual assessment software may be as effective as one-on-one faculty instruction for dental students in fixed prosthodontics.

Keywords: Compare software; dental education; fixed prosthodontics; immediate feedback; virtual assessment software.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Total number of E, S, and N scores received following assessment form at Sessions 1, 5, 10, and 12 for each instructional group. SCI: student–Compare software interaction; SFCI: student–faculty–Compare software interaction; SFI: student–faculty interaction
Figure 2
Figure 2
Number of unacceptable preparations generated by each group at Sessions 1, 5, 10, and 12. SCI: student–Compare software interaction; SFCI: student–faculty–Compare software interaction; SFI: student–faculty interaction
Figure 3
Figure 3
Unacceptable tooth prepared by student SFI‐B at Session 12, (a) occlusal view. Unacceptable tooth prepared by student SFI‐B at Session 12, (b) mesial view
Figure 4
Figure 4
Acceptable tooth prepared by student SFI‐C at Session 12, (a) occlusal view. Acceptable tooth prepared by student SFI‐C at Session 12, (b) mesial view
Figure 5
Figure 5
Unacceptable tooth prepared by student SFCI‐A at Session 12, (a) occlusal view. Unacceptable tooth prepared by student SFCI‐A at Session 12, (b) mesial view. Unacceptable tooth prepared by student SFCI‐A at Session 12, (c) lingual view
Figure 6
Figure 6
Acceptable tooth prepared by student SFCI‐C at Session 12, (a) occlusal view. Acceptable tooth prepared by student SFCI‐C at Session 12, (b) mesial view
Figure 7
Figure 7
Acceptable tooth prepared by student SCI‐A at Session 12, (a) occlusal view. Acceptable tooth prepared by student SCI‐A at Session 12, (b) mesial view

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Buchanan J. A. (2004). Experience with virtual reality‐based technology in teaching restorative dental procedures. Journal of Dental Education, 68(12), 1258–1265. - PubMed
    1. Callan R. S., Haywood V. B., Cooper J. R., Furness A. R., & Looney S. W. (2015). The validity of using E4D Compare's “% Comparison” to assess crown preparations in preclinical dental education. Journal of Dental Education, 79(12), 1445–1451. - PubMed
    1. Fuller J. L. (1972). The effects of training and criterion models on inter‐judge reliability. Journal of Dental Education, 36(4), 19–22. - PubMed
    1. Jasinevicius T. R., Landers M., Nelson S., & Urbankova A. (2004). An evaluation of two dental simulation systems: Virtual reality versus contemporary non‐computer‐assisted. Journal of Dental Education, 68(11), 1151–1162. - PubMed
    1. John V., Papageorge M., Jahangiri L., Wheater M., Cappelli D., Frazer R., & Sohn W. (2011). Recruitment, development, and retention of dental faculty in a changing environment. Journal of Dental Education, 75(1), 82–89. - PubMed
Feedback