Department of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, Germany.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Dec 15;18(24):13218. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182413218.
Regarding the new dental licensing regulations in Germany (AOZ), this study evaluated the effectiveness of two different digital tooth preparation validation systems in comparison to traditional faculty feedback.
Participants were randomly divided into groups: Faculty Feedback (FF: n = 33), PrepCheck (PC: n = 32) and Dental Teacher™ (n = 32). Students had the task to prepare tooth 16 for a retentive full-cast crown. Preparations could be repeated as often as desired. Feedback was provided either by faculty staff or by digital validation systems only. Exams were conducted and graded by two independent and experienced examiners. A survey was performed to evaluate the assessment concepts.
No statistical difference in examination performance between groups could be observed. Nevertheless, the survey showed participants preferred consulting the faculty staff rather than the digital validation systems. Students preferred practising with DT rather than with PC.
Although both classical and digital methods showed comparable results regarding the preparation examination performance, direct feedback by the faculty staff is still appreciated by the students. A combination of both methods is mandatory since demonstration and advice by the teacher is needed. However, digital tooth preparation validation systems are predestined for free practice sessions, providing self-assessment.
关于德国新的牙科许可法规（AOZ），本研究评估了两种不同的数字牙预备验证系统与传统教师反馈相比的有效性。
参与者被随机分为三组：教师反馈（FF：n=33）、PrepCheck（PC：n=32）和 Dental Teacher™（n=32）。学生的任务是为保留性全冠预备 16 号牙。预备可以根据需要重复进行。反馈仅由教师或数字验证系统提供。考试由两名独立且经验丰富的考官进行和评分。进行了一项调查以评估评估概念。
组间检查性能无统计学差异。尽管如此，调查显示参与者更喜欢咨询教师，而不是数字验证系统。学生更喜欢用 DT 练习，而不是用 PC。
尽管经典方法和数字方法在预备检查性能方面都显示出可比的结果，但学生仍然欣赏教师的直接反馈。两种方法的结合是强制性的，因为需要教师的示范和建议。然而，数字牙预备验证系统非常适合自由练习，提供自我评估。
