Limitations of surface mapping technology in accurately identifying critical errors in dental students' crown preparations

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Planmeca Compare software in identifying and quantifying a common critical error in dental students' crown preparations. In 2014-17, a study was conducted at one U.S. dental school that evaluated an ideal crown prep made by a faculty member on a dentoform to modified preps. Two types of preparation errors were created by the addition of flowable composite to the occlusal surface of identical dies of the preparations to represent the underreduction of the distolingual cusp. The error was divided into two classes: The minor class allowed for 1 mm of occlusal clearance, and the major class allowed for no occlusal clearance. The preparations were then digitally evaluated against the ideal preparation using Planmeca Compare. Percent comparison values were obtained from each trial and averaged together. False positives and false negatives were also identified and used to determine the accuracy of the evaluation. Critical errors that did not involve a substantial change in the surface area of the preparation were inconsistently identified. Within the limitations of this study, the authors concluded that the Compare software was unable to consistently identify common critical errors within an acceptable degree of error.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)69-75
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of dental education
Volume82
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Tooth Crown
Dental Students
Crowns
Software
Technology
Dental Schools
student
evaluation
school
flowable hybrid composite
Values

Keywords

  • Assessment
  • CAD/CAM
  • Computer-assisted instruction
  • Crown preparation
  • Dental education
  • Restorative dentistry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

@article{f07da7bfbd074e1795b2ddc00606668c,
title = "Limitations of surface mapping technology in accurately identifying critical errors in dental students' crown preparations",
abstract = "The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Planmeca Compare software in identifying and quantifying a common critical error in dental students' crown preparations. In 2014-17, a study was conducted at one U.S. dental school that evaluated an ideal crown prep made by a faculty member on a dentoform to modified preps. Two types of preparation errors were created by the addition of flowable composite to the occlusal surface of identical dies of the preparations to represent the underreduction of the distolingual cusp. The error was divided into two classes: The minor class allowed for 1 mm of occlusal clearance, and the major class allowed for no occlusal clearance. The preparations were then digitally evaluated against the ideal preparation using Planmeca Compare. Percent comparison values were obtained from each trial and averaged together. False positives and false negatives were also identified and used to determine the accuracy of the evaluation. Critical errors that did not involve a substantial change in the surface area of the preparation were inconsistently identified. Within the limitations of this study, the authors concluded that the Compare software was unable to consistently identify common critical errors within an acceptable degree of error.",
keywords = "Assessment, CAD/CAM, Computer-assisted instruction, Crown preparation, Dental education, Restorative dentistry",
author = "Furness, {Alan R} and Callan, {Richard S} and Mackert, {John Rodway} and Mollica, {Anthony Guy}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.21815/JDE.018.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "82",
pages = "69--75",
journal = "Journal of Dental Education",
issn = "0022-0337",
publisher = "American Dental Education Association",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Limitations of surface mapping technology in accurately identifying critical errors in dental students' crown preparations

AU - Furness, Alan R

AU - Callan, Richard S

AU - Mackert, John Rodway

AU - Mollica, Anthony Guy

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Planmeca Compare software in identifying and quantifying a common critical error in dental students' crown preparations. In 2014-17, a study was conducted at one U.S. dental school that evaluated an ideal crown prep made by a faculty member on a dentoform to modified preps. Two types of preparation errors were created by the addition of flowable composite to the occlusal surface of identical dies of the preparations to represent the underreduction of the distolingual cusp. The error was divided into two classes: The minor class allowed for 1 mm of occlusal clearance, and the major class allowed for no occlusal clearance. The preparations were then digitally evaluated against the ideal preparation using Planmeca Compare. Percent comparison values were obtained from each trial and averaged together. False positives and false negatives were also identified and used to determine the accuracy of the evaluation. Critical errors that did not involve a substantial change in the surface area of the preparation were inconsistently identified. Within the limitations of this study, the authors concluded that the Compare software was unable to consistently identify common critical errors within an acceptable degree of error.

AB - The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Planmeca Compare software in identifying and quantifying a common critical error in dental students' crown preparations. In 2014-17, a study was conducted at one U.S. dental school that evaluated an ideal crown prep made by a faculty member on a dentoform to modified preps. Two types of preparation errors were created by the addition of flowable composite to the occlusal surface of identical dies of the preparations to represent the underreduction of the distolingual cusp. The error was divided into two classes: The minor class allowed for 1 mm of occlusal clearance, and the major class allowed for no occlusal clearance. The preparations were then digitally evaluated against the ideal preparation using Planmeca Compare. Percent comparison values were obtained from each trial and averaged together. False positives and false negatives were also identified and used to determine the accuracy of the evaluation. Critical errors that did not involve a substantial change in the surface area of the preparation were inconsistently identified. Within the limitations of this study, the authors concluded that the Compare software was unable to consistently identify common critical errors within an acceptable degree of error.

KW - Assessment

KW - CAD/CAM

KW - Computer-assisted instruction

KW - Crown preparation

KW - Dental education

KW - Restorative dentistry

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042409213&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042409213&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.21815/JDE.018.010

DO - 10.21815/JDE.018.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 29292328

AN - SCOPUS:85042409213

VL - 82

SP - 69

EP - 75

JO - Journal of Dental Education

JF - Journal of Dental Education

SN - 0022-0337

IS - 1

ER -