Ability of dental students in detection of proximal caries
Journal of Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences,
Vol. 33 No. 3 (2015),
10 March 2019
,
Page 220-224
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v33i3.24712
Abstract
Objective: Tooth decay is one of the most common chronic diseases in the world. After pit and fissures, enamel of proximal surface is the second region prone to rot. Bitewing images are one of the most important diagnostic tools for the detection of caries. Given the importance of accurate and timely detection of decay, the current study was aimed to evaluate the ability and skill of the final- year dental students to identify the presence and depth of proximal caries in dental bitewing radiography.
Methods: In this descriptive cross-sectional study 208 inter proximal surfaces among the 13 dental bitewing radiographs were selected randomly. The radiographs were evaluated by two experienced dental specialists (a radiologist and a restorative specialist) to detect inter proximal decay between teeth. These diagnoses were considered as the gold standard. The radiographs were further assessed by fourteen final-year dental students. Finally, the collected data were analyzed by SPSS-17 software using Kappa coefficient of agreement and ICC. The sensitivity and specificity values were also determined.
Results: The value of Kappa correlation coefficient to assess the similarity between students' responses and gold standards was obtained as 0.28 (p<0.001). The Kappa correlation coefficient for evaluation of the precision of the data was 0.71. The sensitivity in the whole population was 0.43, while the specificity was 0.84.
Conclusion: According to the results obtained in this study, the performance of final year dental students to identify the presence and depth of proximal caries from bitewing radiographs was not satisfactory. Moreover, the ability to detect normal surfaces was unacceptable.- Bitewing
- Dental students
- Depth
- Detection
- Diagnoses
- Proximal caries
- Radiography
How to Cite
References
Bonett JB. The art and science of restorative dentistry. Penn Dent J (Phila) 2007; Spring 2-5.
Fontana M, Zero D. Bridging the gap in caries management between research and practice through education: the Indiana University experience. J Dent Educ 2007; 71: 579-591.
Weerheijm KL. Occlusal 'hidden caries'. Dent Update 1997; 24: 182-184.
Stookey GK, González-Cabezas C. Emerging methods of caries diagnosis. J Dent Educ 2001; 65: 1001-1006.
Barnes CM. Dental hygiene participation in managing incipient and hidden caries. Dent Clin North Am 2005; 49: 795-813, vi-vii.
Wenzel A. Bitewing and digital bitewing radiography for detection of caries lesions. J Dent Res 2004; 83 (Spec No C): C72-75.
Wojtowicz PA, Brooks SL, Hasson H, Kerschbaum WE, Eklund SA. Radiographic detection of approximal caries: a comparison between senior dental students and senior dental hygiene students. J Dent Hyg 2003; 77: 246-251.
Schulte AG, Wittchen A, Stachniss V, Jacquet W, Bottenberg P. Approximal caries diagnosis after data import from different digital radiography systems: interobserver agreement and comparison to histological hard-tissue sections. Caries Res 2008; 42: 57-61.
Hellwig E, Altenburger M, Attin T, Lussi A, Buchalla W. Remineralization of initial carious lesions in deciduous enamel after application of dentifrices of different fluoride concentrations. Clin Oral Investig 2010; 14: 265-269.
Pitts NB, Wefel JS. Remineralization/desensitization: what is known? What is the future? Adv Dent Res 2009; 21: 83-86.
ten Cate JM. Remineralization of caries lesions extending into dentin. J Dent Res 2001; 80: 1407- 1411.
Maupomé G, Sheiham A. Decisions on diagnosis and management of approximal caries by final- year dental students. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1997; 26: 107-111.
Ritter AV, Ramos MD, Astorga F, Shugars DA, Bader JD. Visual-tactile versus radiographic caries detection agreement in caries-active adults. J Public Health Dent 2013; 73: 252-260.
Matalon S, Feuerstein O, Kaffe I. Diagnosis of approximal caries: bite-wing radiology versus the Ultrasound Caries Detector. An in vitro study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003; 95: 626-631.
Kimmes NS, Saini TS, Carroll LR. Comparison of clinician agreement during visualization of conventional and digitized bitewing radiographs. Gen Dent 2006; 54: 182-185.
Diniz MB, Rodriguez JA, Neuhaus KW, Cordeiro RC, Lussi A. Influence of examiner's clinical experience on the reproducibility and accuracy of radiographic examination in detecting occlusal caries. Clin Oral Investig 2010; 14: 515-523.
- Abstract Viewed: 147 times
- PDF Downloaded: 71 times