The Effects of Magnification and Operator’s Experience on the Quality of Preclinical Dental Procedures
Danielle Wajngarten
Department of Social Dentistry, São Paulo State University (UNESP), School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Humaitá Street, 1680. Postcode: 14801-903 Centro, Araraquara, São Paulo State, Brazil.
Júlia Margato Pazos
Department of Social Dentistry, São Paulo State University (UNESP), School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Humaitá Street, 1680. Postcode: 14801-903 Centro, Araraquara, São Paulo State, Brazil.
Patricia Petromilli Nordi Sasso Garcia *
Department of Social Dentistry, São Paulo State University (UNESP), School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Humaitá Street, 1680. Postcode: 14801-903 Centro, Araraquara, São Paulo State, Brazil.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Aims: This study evaluated the effect of magnification on the quality of preclinical class I cavity preparations according to operator’s experience.
Methodology: This was an experimental laboratory study. The response variable was the quality of Class I cavity preparations evaluated by the Class I Cavity Preparation Assessment - COCA. Class I cavity preparations were performed in all artificial first molars under four conditions: unaided visualization, using a simple loupe, using a Galilean loupe, and using a Keplerian loupe (N=640). The two-factor analysis of variance was performed (α=0.05).
Results: No interactions between operator’s experience and magnification device were found (p>0.05). Although, higher quality scores were given to cavity preparations in tooth #36 using the Galilean loupe compared to naked eye (p<0.01). The more experienced operator received higher quality scores for tooth #46 regardless of the magnification system used (µexperienced=7.0±2.3 and µinexperienced=5.4±2.4).
Conclusion: The use of magnification devices did not influence the quality of class I cavity preparations performed on tooth #16, 26, 46. Galilean loupe was associated with improved quality of the cavity preparation performed on tooth #36, and the operator’s experience influenced the quality of the preparation on tooth #46.
Keywords: Dental education, lenses, dental cavity preparation, dentistry