Dentists must be skilled when using dental mirrors. Working with mirrors requires spatial perception, bimanual coordination, perceptual learning and fine motor skills. Many studies have attempted to determine the predictors of manual skills among pre-clinical students, but consensus has yet to be reached. We hypothesized that valid and reliable occupational therapy test performance regarding indirect vision would differ between dental students and junior dentists and would explain the variance in manual skill performance in pre-clinical courses. To test this hypothesis, we applied the Purdue Pegboard test and O’Connor Tweezer Dexterity test under different conditions of direct and indirect vision. We administered these tests to students in phantom-head academic courses in 2015 and 2016 and to junior dentists. Students performed the tests at three time points: before phantom training (T0), at the end of the training (T1) and in the middle of the following year of study (T2). Dentists performed the same tests twice at 1st and 2nd trials one week apart. The results showed that indirect tasks were significantly more difficult to perform for both groups. These dexterity tests were sensitive enough to detect students’ improvement after phantom training. The dentists’ performances were significantly better than those of students at T0, specifically with regard to the use of tweezers under direct and indirect vision (the O’Connor test). A regression analysis showed that students’ manual grades obtained at the beginning of the phantom course, their performance on the Purdue test using both hands, and their performance on the O’Connor test under indirect vision predicted phantom course success in 80% of cases. The O’Connor test under indirect vision is the most informative means of monitoring and predicting the manual skills required in the pre-clinical year of dentistry studies.

Although three-dimensional (3D) printing technology is increasingly used in dental education, its application regarding the provision of online visual augmented feedback has not been tested. Thus, this study aimed to: (1) develop two generations of multicolored 3D-printed teeth that provide visual augmented feedback for students conducting the cavity preparation process, (2) assess students' clinical performance after training on the 3D models, and (3) acquire student feedback. For the first-generation model, augmented feedback was obtained from five 3D-printed teeth models for five cavity preparation procedures. Each model comprised three layers printed in green, yellow, and red indicating whether preparation was acceptable, limited, or unacceptable, respectively. The study used a crossover design in which the experimental group trained on five multicolored models and 10 standard plastic teeth, and the control group trained on 15 standard plastic teeth. Students gave positive feedback of the methodology but complained about the printed material's hardness. Therefore, a second-generation model was developed: the model's occlusal plane was replaced with a harder printed acrylic material, and the experiment was repeated. During training, instructors provided external terminal feedback only for performance on standard plastic teeth. Manual grades for cavity preparations on standard plastic teeth were compared. No significant differences were found between the control and experimental groups in both generations' models. However, less instructor time was needed, and similar clinical results were obtained after training with both generations. Thus, multicolored 3D-printed teeth models promote self-learning during the process of acquiring manual skills and reduce student dependency on instructors. Anat Sci Educ 14: 629-640.

Impression technique is one of the factors affecting restoration fit accuracy, which is a major aspect influencing its survival. The purpose of this study is to compare, in vivo, the effect of two commonly used Vinyl Polysiloxane (VPS) impression techniques on the metal framework fitting of fixed partial dentures. Ninety-two consecutive patients, diagnosed as partially edentulous, treated by fixed partial denture restorations, participated in the study. Group 1-impressions (n = 44) were subjected to the 1-step technique, while group 2 impressions (n = 48) were subjected the 2-step technique. Three accuracy assessment common methods: probe, tactile sense and radiographic test, were used to validate the clinical fit of the metal framework. Misfit was defined as even one test failure. Twenty-one (22.8%) out of 92 metal frameworks exhibited metal frameworks misfit, whereas the other 71 (77.2%) were found to be accurate. Group 1 presented significantly (p = 0.04) more metal frameworks misfit, 14/44 (31.8%) vs. 7/48 (14.6%). Restoration location (maxilla vs. mandible) had no statistically significant impact on the results (p = 0.461). The use of the VPS putty/wash 2-step impression technique is recommended to improve the clinical fit of fixed partial denture restorations.