An interventional study for improving the manual dexterity of dentistry students.

OBJECTIVES:Traditionally, the acquisition of manual skills in most dental schools worldwide is based on exercises on plastic teeth placed in a "phantom head simulator". No manual trainings are done at home. Studies revealed that preliminary training of one motoric task leads to significant improvement in performance of the required motoric task that has similar components. Performing tasks indirectly via a dental mirror are complicated for the young dental students. We hypothesized that instructed training of basic skills required in dentistry at home on a tool simulating the phantom laboratory will improve the capabilities of the students and will be reflected by their clinical grades. METHODS:We developed a portable tool PhantHome which is composed of jaws, gingival tissue, rubber cover and a compatible stand. Specific teeth produced by a 3D printer with drills in different directions were placed in both jaws. Students were requested to insert pins by using tweezers and dental mirror according to instructions initiating with easy tasks and continue to ones that are more complicated. 106 first clinical year dental students participated in the study; 65 trained only in the traditional phantom lab (control). 41 trained at home by the PhantHome tool two weeks before and 2 months during the initial stage of phantom lab. The students grades routinely provided in the phantom laboratory at different stages were compared. RESULTS:Students who trained with the portable tool performed better than the control group in the first direct and second indirect preparations (p<0.05). These exams were taken when the PhantHome was available to the students. Then, the tool was returned and the phantom course continued regularly. We believe that this is why no differences between the grades of the groups were observed further on. CONCLUSIONS:Training by the PhantHome improves motor skills and consequently the clinical performances

Predicting the clinical performance of dental students with a manual dexterity test

<div><p>Dentists must be skilled when using dental mirrors. Working with mirrors requires spatial perception, bimanual coordination, perceptual learning and fine motor skills. Many studies have attempted to determine the predictors of manual skills among pre-clinical students, but consensus has yet to be reached. We hypothesized that valid and reliable occupational therapy test performance regarding indirect vision would differ between dental students and junior dentists and would explain the variance in manual skill performance in pre-clinical courses. To test this hypothesis, we applied the Purdue Pegboard test and O’Connor Tweezer Dexterity test under different conditions of direct and indirect vision. We administered these tests to students in phantom-head academic courses in 2015 and 2016 and to junior dentists. Students performed the tests at three time points: before phantom training (T0), at the end of the training (T1) and in the middle of the following year of study (T2). Dentists performed the same tests twice at 1^st and 2^nd trials one week apart. The results showed that indirect tasks were significantly more difficult to perform for both groups. These dexterity tests were sensitive enough to detect students’ improvement after phantom training. The dentists’ performances were significantly better than those of students at T0, specifically with regard to the use of tweezers under direct and indirect vision (the O’Connor test). A regression analysis showed that students’ manual grades obtained at the beginning of the phantom course, their performance on the Purdue test using both hands, and their performance on the O’Connor test under indirect vision predicted phantom course success in 80% of cases. The O’Connor test under indirect vision is the most informative means of monitoring and predicting the manual skills required in the pre-clinical year of dentistry studies.</p></div

Mean and SD of the O’Connor Tweezer test scores for cohort 1 (N = 39) and the dentists (N = 15).

<p>Mean and SD of the O’Connor Tweezer test scores for cohort 1 (N = 39) and the dentists (N = 15).</p

Mean and SD of the Purdue tests scores for cohort 1 (N = 39) and dentists (N = 15) under direct (a) and indirect vision (b).

<p>Mean and SD of the Purdue tests scores for cohort 1 (N = 39) and dentists (N = 15) under direct (a) and indirect vision (b).</p

Correlations between student (Cohort 1, N = 39) independent variables at T0 and the Final.Phantom.

<p>Correlations between student (Cohort 1, N = 39) independent variables at T0 and the Final.Phantom.</p

Purdue Pegboard test and O’Connor Tweezer test under direct (Top) and indirect (Bottom) vision.

<p>Purdue Pegboard test and O’Connor Tweezer test under direct (Top) and indirect (Bottom) vision.</p