Aim To compare the educational outcomes using artificial teeth versus extracted teeth for pre‐clinical endodontic training. Data sources Literature searches of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Trip Database, Web of Science and Open Grey databases were conducted from their inception until November 2018 with no language restriction. Hand searching of most likely relevant journals was performed. The review followed the PRISMA guidelines. Study eligibility criteria, participants and interventions Studies that compared pre‐clinical endodontic training using extracted teeth and artificial teeth were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods The quality of included studies was appraised by Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools. The findings were tabulated and summarized according to their outcomes with distinct narrative syntheses. Results Five studies were included. The component studies included 359 operators in total, mainly consisting of undergraduate students (97%, n = 349) and 10 endodontists (3%). Forty‐seven per cent (n = 170) operated on artificial teeth only, whilst 19% (n = 67) worked primarily on extracted teeth, with the final treatment outcome being evaluated by independent observers using objective criteria. Operators in two studies (34%, n = 122) used both artificial teeth and ET and compared their experiences in surveys. Regarding technical outcomes, no significant differences between training with artificial teeth and extracted teeth were found, but the performance tended to be better in artificial teeth than extracted teeth. Operators trained solely on artificial teeth appeared to be adequately educated for subsequent root canal treatment (RCT) in the clinical setting. Limitations Due to the scarcity of research on the topic overall, and the methodological variation between the studies, it was not possible to perform a quantitative analysis (meta‐analysis). Conclusions and implications of key findings Based on the available evidence, the use of artificial teeth for pre‐clinical endodontic training achieved similar educational outcomes compared to extracted teeth. However, the experiences reported by the operators diverged. Further studies assessing other artificial teeth available in the market testing other RCT procedures are necessary.
This study aimed to determine the difficulty level of extracted teeth treated by undergraduate students for pre-clinical endodontic training. Two independent observers assessed a consecutive sample of 1000 periapical radiographs of extracted teeth used in endodontic pre-clinical training. Chi-square test was used to evaluate the adjustment of the distribution, and inter-and intra-examiner agreement were calculated. Minimal, moderate and high difficulty teeth represented 23.1%, 52.1% and 24.8%, respectively. The presence of curvature was the most common grading factor, with 'moderate curvature' reported in 28.7%, and 'extreme curvature' reported in 15.6% of the sample. A difference in the distribution of frequencies was found, favouring the moderate category (P < 0.001). The inter-and intra-examiner strength of agreement were 0.78 and 0.86, respectively. More than 50% of the teeth were categorised as moderate complexity. Almost one-quarter of the total sample, in particular molars, was classified as high complexity, thus unsuitable for undergraduate pre-clinical training.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.