Performance of two different digital evaluation systems used for assessing pre-clinical dental students' prosthodontic technical skills.

Abstract

Proper integration of newly emerging digital assessment tools is a central issue in dental education in an effort to provide more accurate and objective feedback to students. The study examined how the outcomes of students' tooth preparation were correlated when evaluated using traditional faculty assessment and two types of digital assessment approaches. Specifically, incorporation of the Romexis Compare 2.0 (Compare) and Sirona prepCheck 1.1 (prepCheck) systems was evaluated. Additionally, satisfaction of students based on the type of software was evaluated through a survey. Students in a second-year pre-clinical prosthodontics course were allocated to either Compare (n=42) or prepCheck (n=37) systems. All students received conventional instruction and used their assigned digital system as an additional evaluation tool to aid in assessing their work. Examinations assessed crown preparations of the maxillary right central incisor (#8) and the mandibular left first molar (#19). All submissions were graded by faculty, Compare and prepCheck. Technical scores did not differ between student groups for any of the assessment approaches. Compare and prepCheck had modest, statistically significant correlations with faculty scores with a minimum correlation of 0.3944 (P=0.0011) and strong, statistically significant correlations with each other with a minimum correlation of 0.8203 (P<0.0001). A post-course student survey found that 55.26% of the students felt unfavourably about learning the digital evaluation protocols. A total of 62.31% felt favourably about the integration of these digital tools into the curriculum. Comparison of Compare and prepCheck showed no evidence of significant difference in students' prosthodontics technical performance and perception.