The Validity of Using E4D Compare's “% Comparison” to Assess Crown Preparations in Preclinical Dental Education

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.

Comparing feedback from faculty interactions and virtual assessment software in the development of psychomotor skills in preclinical fixed prosthodontics

“…Software‐generated comparison percentages calculated by virtual comparison of student preparations versus a standard preparation have been suggested as a reliable and consistent method of student assessment (Renne et al, ). However, to date, no correlation has been found between faculty assessments of student work and comparison percentages (Callan, Haywood, Cooper, Furness, & Looney, ).…”

Development of an assessment strategy in preclinical fixed prosthodontics course using virtual assessment software—Part 1

“…They concluded that the numerical comparison generated by the software is more precise than faculty assessments. However, in , Callan, Haywood, Cooper, Furness, and Looney found no correlation between faculty assessments and the percentage comparison values computed by the software. This discrepancy may arise from the fact that the percentage comparison feature does not assess numerous criteria considered fundamental to tooth preparation that are assessed by faculty.…”

Teaching removable partial denture design: ‘METACIEL’, a novel digital procedure

“…In this context, companies, specialized in CAD/CAM technology (Computer Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacturing), developed specific teaching software to evaluate the quality of dental preparation realized on physical simulation model, with a high number of manageable parameters. Assessment of such system proved to be of great educational value, 1 , 2 and this software is also used for teaching oral cavities in restorative dentistry and dental anatomy. 3 , 4 It turned out to be a very interesting preclinical teaching tool.…”