Evaluation of new endodontic tooth models in clinical education from the perspective of students and demonstrators

Abstract

Abstract Background The quality of root canal treatments performed by undergraduate students is often unsatisfactory questioning the current methods of teaching. Based on treatment errors made by students participating the endodontic courses at RWTH Aachen University (Germany), new radiopaque artificial root canal treatment models (DRSK RCT; incisor, premolar, molar) were designed and developed. The aim of the study was to evaluate these models by groups of students and demonstrators. Methods A total number of 60 students and seven demonstrators from a single institution (RWTH Aachen) participated in this study. They performed endodontic treatments on either initial versions of the DRSK RCT or modified versions. The initial versions were evaluated by students (n = 25) and demonstrators (n = 7). The obtained questionnaire was conducted as 7-point Likert-Scale covering the topics material properties, feeling while performing exercises and perception of its closeness to reality via 19 items (students) and 21 items (demonstrators). According to the evaluations several alterations were applied to the DRSK RCT, the whole study was repeated and evaluated by different students (n = 35) and the same demonstrators (n = 7). Additionally, the demonstrators blindly evaluated the quality of root canal treatments performed by the students (n = 35) on the modified DRSK RCT. Comparisons between the initial versions and the modified versions were calculated using Chi-squared tests. Results Students as well as demonstrators positively evaluated both variants of the DRSK RCT with especially high ratings in the overall evaluation. Students’ rating of the pulp anatomy significantly increased from 5.4 ± 1.1 (mean ± SD) to 5.9 ± 0.9 (mean ± SD; p < 0.05) for the modified model. Likewise, students felt that the ability to flare root canals improved after alterations have been applied. Ratings significantly increased from 4.8 ± 1.6 (mean ± SD) to 5.6 ± 1.0 (mean ± SD; p < 0.05). Conclusion The results indicate that the DRSK RCT is a promising candidate to be used as an alternative to extracted teeth or as an additional tool for improving dental education. However, some limitations of our analysis have to be considered.