About this trial
This study aims to compare traditional faculty-based assessment with two AI-assisted digital self-assessment software programs for evaluating tooth preparations for metal-ceramic crowns for undergraduate dental preclinical students at College of Dentistry El Alamein, AAST in terms of: (1) Accuracy of preparation outcomes, (2) Student learning outcomes over a training period.
Eligibility criteria
This trial does not accept healthy volunteersQualifiers
Third-year preclinical dental student
Completion of the fixed prosthodontics tooth-preparation course.
No prior formal training or use of digital 3D tooth-preparation assessment software.
Disqualifiers
previous repetition of the course
Substantial prior experience with digital metrology/3D inspection software
Inability to attend all scheduled training and examination sessions.
Trial design
Parallel
Treatments tested in this trial
Non-metrology-grade digital group (NMG)
Other interventionStudents in NMG used a license-free 3D comparison workflow (Medit Link/Compare, Compare tool; Medit Compare v3.4.9; Medit) to superimpose the prepared-tooth scan (TT-STL) onto the unprepared reference scan (RTS-STL).
metrology-grade digital group (MG)
Other interventionStudents in MG used metrology-grade 3D inspection software (Geomagic Control X v2018.1.1; 3D Systems)to superimpose TT-STL onto RTS-STL. Initial Alignment was performed followed by Best Fit Alignment (iterative closest point registration).
Traditional group (TG)
Other interventionStudents in TG assessed reduction with a silicone putty index and a periodontal probe across the previously predefined regions. Feedback was provided by experienced instructors (≥5 years of clinical teaching experience) using the same regional assessment approach.
Treatment groups
Trial outcomes
Primary outcomes
Change in preparation scores
Preparations were scored with a prespecified 10-item rubric derived from ADEX criteria for mandibular first molar metal-ceramic crown preparation (overall score 0-10). Each item was rated on a 3-level scale (0, 0.5, or 1) and summed to obtain a total score
RMS deviation from the ideal preparation
all the resulting TT-STL files across all sessions (from 1-5) of the study of the three groups of prepared teeth were compared with the ideal preparation
Sponsors and contacts
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.