Virtual reality simulators are becoming increasingly popular in dental schools across the world. But to what extent do these systems reflect actual dental ability? Addressing this question of construct validity is a fundamental step that is necessary before these systems can be fully integrated into a dental school's curriculum. In this study, we examined the sensitivity of the Simodont (a haptic virtual reality dental simulator) to differences in dental training experience. Two hundred and eighty-nine participants, with 1 (n = 92), 3 (n = 79), 4 (n = 57) and 5 (n = 61) years of dental training, performed a series of tasks upon their first exposure to the simulator. We found statistically significant differences between novice (Year 1) and experienced dental trainees (operationalised as 3 or more years of training), but no differences between performance of experienced trainees with varying levels of experience. This work represents a crucial first step in understanding the value of haptic virtual reality simulators in dental education.
Aim To investigate the effect of qualitatively different types of pedagogical feedback (FB) on the training, transfer and retention of basic manual dexterity dental skills using a virtual reality (VR) haptic dental simulator. Methods Sixty‐three participants (M = 22.7 years; SD = 3.4 years), with no previous dental training, were randomly allocated to one of three groups (n = 21 each). Group 1 received device‐only feedback during the training phase, that is the visual display of the simulator (DFB); Group 2 received verbal feedback from a qualified dental instructor (IFB); and Group 3 received a combination of instructor and device feedback (IDFB). Participants completed four tasks during which feedback was given according to group allocation as well as two skills transfer tests. Skill retention was examined immediately after training, at 1 week and at 1 month post‐test. Results Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in overall performance (P < 0.001) and error (P = 0.006). Post hoc comparisons revealed the IDFB group produced substantially better performance and fewer errors in comparison with DFB and IFB training. This difference translated to improved performance in skill retention and generalisation of knowledge to novel tasks. Conclusion These data indicate that the acquisition and retention of basic dental motor skills in novice trainees is best optimised through a combination of instructor and visual display (VR)‐driven feedback. The results have implications for the utility and implementation of VR haptic technology in dental education.
BackgroundPrediction of clinical training aptitude in medicine and dentistry is largely driven by measures of a student’s intellectual capabilities. The measurement of sensorimotor ability has lagged behind, despite being a key constraint for safe and efficient practice in procedure-based medical specialties. Virtual reality (VR) haptic simulators, systems able to provide objective measures of sensorimotor performance, are beginning to establish their utility in facilitating sensorimotor skill acquisition, and it is possible that they may also inform the prediction of clinical performance.MethodsA retrospective cohort study examined the relationship between student performance on a haptic VR simulator in the second year of undergraduate dental study with subsequent clinic performance involving patients 2 years later. The predictive ability was tested against a phantom-head crown test (a traditional preclinical dental assessment, in the third year of study).ResultsVR scores averaged across the year explained 14% of variance in clinic performance, while the traditional test explained 5%. Students who scored highly on this averaged measure were ~10 times more likely to be high performers in the clinical crown test. Exploratory analysis indicated that single-trial VR scores did not correlate with real-world performance, but the relationship was statistically significant and strongest in the first half of the year and weakened over time.ConclusionsThe data demonstrate the potential of a VR haptic simulator to predict clinical performance and open up the possibility of taking a data-driven approach to identifying individuals who could benefit from support in the early stages of training.
PurposeOne suggested advantage of human binocular vision is the facilitation of sophisticated motor control behaviours via stereopsis – but little empirical evidence exists to support this suggestion. We examined the functional significance of stereopsis by exploring whether stereopsis is used to perform a highly skilled real‐world motor task essential for the occupational practice of dentistry.MethodsWe used a high fidelity virtual reality simulator to study how dentists’ performance is affected by the removal of horizontal retinal image disparities under direct and indirect (mirror) observation. Thirteen qualified dentists performed a total of four different dental tasks under non‐stereoscopic and stereoscopic vision conditions, with two levels of task complexity (direct and indirect observation) using a virtual reality dental simulator.ResultsDepth related errors were significantly higher under non‐stereoscopic viewing but lateral errors did not differ between conditions. Indirect observation led to participants drilling less of the target area compared to direct viewing, but this did not interact with the stereopsis manipulation.ConclusionsThe data confirm that dental practitioners use stereopsis and its presence results in improved dental performance. It remains to be determined whether individuals with stereo‐deficits can compensate adequately. Nevertheless, these findings suggest an important role for stereopsis within at least one occupation and justify the design of simulators with 3D displays.
including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request.
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.