No abstract

Recent efforts have been directed towards utilizing CAD/CAM technology in the education of future dentists. The purpose of this pilot study was to investigate the feasibility of implementing CAD/CAM technology in instruction on preparing a tooth for restoration. Students at one dental school were assigned access to CAD/CAM technology vs. traditional preparation methods in a randomized, crossover design. In a convenience sample of a second-year class, seventy-six of the seventy-nine students volunteered to participate, for a response rate of 96 percent. Two analyses were performed on this pilot data: a primary effectiveness analysis comparing students' competency exam scores by intervention group (intention-to-treat analysis) and a secondary eficacy analysis comparing competency exam scores among students who reported using CAD/CAM versus those who did not. The effectiveness analysis showed no difference in outcomes by intervention group assignment. While student survey results indicated interest in utilizing the technology, the actual utilization rate was much less than one might anticipate, yielding a sample size that limited statistical power. The secondary analysis demonstrated higher mean competency exam scores for students reporting use of CAD/CAM compared to those who did not use the technology, but these results did not reach statistical signiicance (p=0.075). Prior research has investigated the eficacy of CAD/CAM in a controlled educational trial, but this study adds to the literature by investigating student use of CAD/CAM in a real-world, self-study fashion. Further studies should investigate ways in which to increase student utilization of CAD/CAM and whether or not increased utilization, with a larger sample size, would yield signiicant outcomes.

No abstract

When a dental school is deciding which technology to introduce into a curriculum, it is important to identify the educational goals for the system. The authors' primary goal for the use of a computer-aided resource was to offer students another way to assess their performance, to enhance their learning, and to potentially decrease their learning curve in the preclinical environment prior to using the technique in clinical patient care. The aim of this study was to examine the validity of the "% Comparison" numbers derived from the E4D Compare software program. Three practical examinations were administered to a class of 82 students at one U.S. dental school over a six-week period. The grading of the practical examinations was performed with individual faculty members being responsible for evaluating speciic aspects of each preparation. A digital image of each student's practical examination tooth was then obtained and compared to the digital image of an ideal preparation. The preparations were compared, and the "% Comparison" was recorded at ive tolerance levels. Spearman's correlation coeficient (SCC) was used to measure the agreement in rankings between the faculty scores on practical exams 1-3 and the scores obtained using E4D Compare at the different tolerance levels. The SCC values for practical exams 2 and 3 were all between 0.2 and 0.4; for practical exam 1, the SCC values ranged from 0.47 to 0.56. There was no correlation between the faculty scores and the numbers given by the "% Comparison" of the software.