3D Printed Teeth with Enamel and Dentin Layer for Educating Dental Students in Crown Preparation

Abstract

Commonly used model teeth are so far uniform in color and hardness. There is no discrimination between enamel and dentin part of a tooth. This condition makes it difficult to train a preparation technique, which is adapted to real tooth substance. The aim of this study was to design and establish a 3D printed tooth with different layers for enamel and dentin for education in crown preparation. A printable tooth with different layers for enamel and dentin was designed, and all 38 fourth‐year dental students in the first clinical course in prosthodontics and 30 experienced dentists were trained during a voluntary hands‐on course in 2019. Prior to the study, the students had used standard model teeth and real‐teeth models in their preclinical education. They had experience in caries removal and preparation on real patients. The perceived benefits of the 3D printed tooth were evaluated by a questionnaire. All individuals in both groups completed the questionnaire, for a 100% response rate. The results showed that the printed tooth was given an overall mean grade of 2.3 (students) and 2.0 (experts) on a scale from 1=excellent to 5=poor. The difference in hardness between the dentin and enamel layer was given a mean of 2.4 (students and experts) and the difference in color a 1.7 (students) and 1.8 (experts). The tooth model with the prepared tooth illustrating an ideal preparation was graded 1.6 (students and experts). In this study, the students had the opportunity to learn a correct crown preparation on a printed tooth with different material properties for enamel and dentin. The learning effect with this tooth model was rated as good on the questionnaire by both students and expert dentists.

3D-printed Surgical Training Model Based on Real Patient Situations for Dental Education

“…This set these printed models apart from conventionally fabricated models. The learning effect of preparing a crown was rated as good by the students in this study [16]. Shortly before, Höhne and Schmitter had produced 3D-printed models with carious lesions and had them evaluated by students.…”

“…Thus, we were not able to check an important quality aspect of the models. Höhne et al solved this issue in their 2019 study by having their 3D-printed models evaluated, not only by 38 students, but also by 30 experienced dentists [16]. Such a test was missing in our study.…”

“…This can clearly be seen as beneficial, as it avoids systematic bias. In a comparable study in the literature [16], the evaluation of the corresponding models took place in the context of a special event with voluntary participants. With such an approach, however, it must be feared that particularly interested or motivated students participate and that the group of students as a whole is not represented.…”

“…Shortly before, Höhne and Schmitter had produced 3D-printed models with carious lesions and had them evaluated by students. These models also received a good rating [17].…”

“…In a recent study from 2019, Höhne and colleagues [16] used 3D printing to create tooth models in which enamel and dentin could be distinguished. This set these printed models apart from conventionally fabricated models.…”