Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 382
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 


 
Table of Contents   
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 18  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 284-287
Evaluation of tooth preparations for Class II cavities using magnification loupes among dental interns and final year BDS students in preclinical laboratory


1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
2 Department of Public Health Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Submission27-Feb-2015
Date of Decision11-Apr-2015
Date of Acceptance17-May-2015
Date of Web Publication1-Jul-2015
 

   Abstract 

Background: With the advances in optical technology, dentistry has been benefitted in varied ways over the ages.
Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of dental magnification loupes on psychomotor skill acquisition during preclinical operative exercise.
Methods: 40 Typhodont teeth tooth no. 36 and 46 (Frasaco - U.S.A.) were mounted on the acrylic lower jaw base of Phantom Head. Teeth are prepared for class II (MO) cavity with conservative design using micromotor, mouth mirror and probe. Tooth no.36 was prepared using magnifying loupes while tooth no.46 was prepared without the loupes. Data collected was statistically analyzed using Chi square test.
Results: The results revealed that tooth preparations were better under magnifying loupes as compared to those without it with statistically significant difference with Kappa value 0.64 for samples with loupes and 0.76 for without loupes. Moreover, the study samples expressed their difficulty for using the magnifying loupes during the tooth preparation since they were using it for the first time.
Conclusions: Magnifying loupes help the dental students to have better vision, thus improved dexterity with hands while preparing the tooth for restoration. However, dental students have to get adapted to the loupes for the ease of using loupes. Using loupes frequently may help them to get adapted to the loupes.

Keywords: Class II cavity; magnifying loupes; psychomotor skills; tooth preparation

How to cite this article:
Narula K, Kundabala M, Shetty N, Shenoy R. Evaluation of tooth preparations for Class II cavities using magnification loupes among dental interns and final year BDS students in preclinical laboratory. J Conserv Dent 2015;18:284-7

How to cite this URL:
Narula K, Kundabala M, Shetty N, Shenoy R. Evaluation of tooth preparations for Class II cavities using magnification loupes among dental interns and final year BDS students in preclinical laboratory. J Conserv Dent [serial online] 2015 [cited 2021 May 16];18:284-7. Available from: https://www.jcd.org.in/text.asp?2015/18/4/284/159724

   Introduction Top


Over the years the emphasis has been placed on conservative tooth preparation for restoring carious lesions. Dentists are focusing on more conservative designs of tooth preparations using modern optical aids for rendering better treatment to their patients.

Dentistry requires specific motor skills in association with good visual acuity. Dentistry has been greatly benefitted from the advances in optical technology such as magnification loupes and operating microscopes. [1] Though each of them have their own merits and demerits, they help in improving precision required beyond unaided vision. Magnification is useful at any age for a dentist to perform precisely restorative and endodontic procedures.

Magnification loupes are used in dentistry where increased visual performance is needed. Increased magnification and improved illumination of the operating field has many benefits for the operator, especially in endodontics. [2] The treatment quality improves through the usage of magnifying devices. The ability to work with a high level of accuracy and improved control reduces treatment time and reduces operator fatigue. According to various data, it has been found that every dental professional is at a potential risk for developing occupational musculoskeletal problems including the vision and posture in which the clinician sits. Slight modification in posture and vision through the usage of magnifying aids can improve the work efficiency of the clinician. [3]

Achromatic compound magnification loupes increase the size from ×2 to ×5, though magnification of ×2.5 to ×4 is generally used for restorative procedures. [4] The interest and use of loupes among dental practitioners and students appears to be growing. [5] Thus, the use of appropriate visual enhancement should be considered for all dental professionals to make the practice of dentistry more precise, easy, and more enjoyable; and thereby reducing the risk of musculoskeletal problems. The objective of this study was to evaluate clinical performance during tooth preparations for Class II cavities using magnification loupes among dental interns and final year BDS students in the preclinical laboratory.


   Materials and Methods Top


Forty Nos of Typhodont teeth #36 (20 Nos) and #46 (20 Nos) (Frasaco-USA) mounted on a lower acrylic jaw base of phantom head were prepared for a conservative mesio-occlusal (MO) Class II cavity design using micromotor, mouth mirror, explorer and periodontal probe in preclinical laboratory of conservative dentistry, and endodontics. The sample size comprised of dental interns and final year BDS students is divided equally into two groups, aged between 22 and 24 years. The study groups were asked to prepare two teeth each #36 was prepared using magnifying loupes (Heine [Germany], HR ×2.5, 420 mm/162) while #46 was prepared without the loupes. The subjects were chosen having a normal vision or eye power <−3 diopters. Tooth preparations were done according to the descriptions. [6] The prepared cavity designs were evaluated by two senior faculty members for the quality. The rating scale: "Rating System for Quality Evaluation of Prepared Cavities" was followed for the evaluation of the cavity designs. [7]



A simple questionnaire was distributed to all the samples to evaluate the ease of adaptation with loupes. "How did you find working with the loupes?"

The ease was graded as follows:

  • Grade 1: Difficult.
  • Grade 2: Partially comfortable.
  • Grade 3: Easy/comfortable.



   Results Top


The results were analyzed using Chi-square test.

The cavity preparations were analyzed by two examiners and tested for inter examiner reliability. The results, which were analyzed using the "kappa value" showed us that there exists a difference between cavity preparations done under loupes and those done without it [Table 1]. Both the examiner's reliability of frequency in assessing cavity preparation favored the cavity preparations done under loupes as compared to those which were done without it [Table 2] and [Table 3]. Grade R, S, M were considered as satisfactory, and T and V were considered nonsatisfactory. [7]
Table 1: Inter examiner reliability to assess the cavity preparation


Click here to view
Table 2: Examiner 1 reliability of frequency in assessing cavity preparation


Click here to view
Table 3: Examiner 2 reliability of frequency in assessing cavity preparation


Click here to view


The data were analyzed for the satisfaction attained while doing cavity preparations for both, that is, cavity preparation done under loupes and without loupes. Satisfactory results were attained for the cavity preparations done using magnifying loupes [Table 4] and [Table 5].
Table 4: Satisfactory or Non satisfactory cavity preparation using loupes


Click here to view
Table 5: Satisfactory or Non satisfactory cavity preparation without using loupes


Click here to view


The study samples found that the tooth preparation done under loupes were difficult as compared to without loupes [Table 6].
Table 6: Ease of cavity preparation using loupes


Click here to view



   Discussion Top


Magnifying loupes have stepped as a boon in the dental market as the very fine details in cavity preparations can be visualized at a glance without straining the normal eyesight. Dimitrijevic et al. suggested routine testing of perceptual and visual abilities for the dental students and dentists so that difficulties can be identified and treated early in their dental education by examining dentist's and dental student's abilities to estimate small depths and distances. They found that individual perceptual abilities vary widely. [8] The quality of the dental work carried out by a dentist is dependent on experience, training, and manual dexterity, which are the a predictors for successful dental performance. [9],[10],[11] However, dentistry also requires good perceptual and visual skills, not only for gathering clinical information, and diagnosis but more specifically for judging positions, distances, and the size of objects; and to improve clinical performance. Moreover, dental students may have visual or interpretative defects that would make acquisition of manual skills and interpretation of instruction difficult. [12],[13]

Hence, this study was planned to evaluate the quality of tooth preparation of MO Class II cavities prepared by final BDS students and interns using loupes and compare them with teeth prepared without loupes. Good eyesight is essential to providing the best dental care for patients. Literature has reported that some dental students had undetected visual defects that could potentially have influenced the performance of precise practical tasks and suggested that prospective dental students undertake visual screening tests prior to their acceptance into dental schools. [8] However, with the advent of loupes any slight discrepancy can be altered before any devastating effect (e.g., missed root canal in maxillary second premolars or undermined enamel walls in Class II cavity) emerges in near future, thus raising the standard of treatment quality provided.

This study was done on dental interns and final year students because they are not well versed with loupes and tooth preparation done by them will definitely guide us to advise regarding the usage of loupes. To standardize the difference in cavity preparations #36 and #46 were selected under direct vision, and MO cavity design was chosen. #36 was prepared using magnifying loupes while #46 was prepared under normal vision (i.e., without loupes).

The results revealed that cavity preparations are better under magnifying loupes than without loupes, with a statistically significant difference as per kappa values (0.64 with loupes and 0.76 without loupes) and Chi-square value (8.01). While evaluating the quality of tooth preparation around 80% of the cavity preparations was categorized "satisfactory" with the loupes as compared to 20%, which were categorized "nonsatisfactory." This could be due to the use of loupes to provide greater detail of the oral cavity with better, clearer vision of the operating area, thereby reducing eyestrain, but do so without the need to be closer to the patient. During intense near visual work, the ciliary muscle of the eye, which produces accommodation (focusing) and the extra-ocular muscles, which converge the visual axis of each eye on to the object of interest, become fatigued. However, loupes magnify the operating site to ×2.5 to ×6. Hence, it may indirectly help to improve the quality of the work by improving the visibility of the operating site. It may also help to improve posture by subconscious attempts. [3],[14] While comparing the ease of tooth preparation between lopes and normal vision without loupes, the study groups found working under normal vision are more comfortable than with loupes. This could be because of the relative inexperience of undergraduates with loupes.

Similar studies conducted by Buhrley et al., Farook et al. and Maggio et al. showed that working with the magnifying loupes is always better. Loupes not only influence the musculoskeletal health of the professional but also help improve the quality of the treatment. [2],[5],[15]

As the age advances the visual acuity diminishes due to presbyopia. Magnifying loupes do play a major role in visualizing the minute details of the cavity without straining the eye muscles. [15] Every dental professional is at a potential risk for developing an occupational musculoskeletal injury. The vision and posture in which the clinician sits is strongly correlated, improving the work efficiency of the clinician. Eichenberger et al. evaluated the near visual acuity of 40 dentists and its improvement by using different magnification devices and they concluded that near visual acuity varies highly between individuals and decreases during the lifetime. Independent of age or natural vision, visual acuity can be significantly improved by using magnification devices. [16] Thus, by using the appropriate visual enhancement should be considered for all dental professionals to make the practice of dentistry easier, and more enjoyable, and to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal injury.

According to the results of the present study magnifying loupes, can be recommended to include in the undergraduate armamentarium.


   Conclusions Top


Magnification loupes have significantly enhanced the quality of cavity preparations done by final year BDS students and interns during preclinical dental educational work. However, more practice with loupes is needed for convenience of its use.

Acknowledgments

I would thank the following people whose contribution has been instrumental in carrying out this study:

  • Dr. Dilip Naik (Dean, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore).
  • Final year B.D.S. students and Interns (Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore).


Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
Bowers DJ, Glickman GN, Solomon ES, He J. Magnification′s effect on endodontic fine motor skills. J Endod 2010;36:1135-8.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Buhrley LJ, Barrows MJ, BeGole EA, Wenckus CS. Effect of magnification on locating the MB2 canal in maxillary molars. J Endod 2002;28:324-7.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Friedman MJ. Magnification in a restorative dental practice: From loupes to microscopes. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2004;25:48, 50, 53-5.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Tony Druttman Top 10 Tips: Magnification and Illumination. Available from: http://www.londonendo.co.uk. [Last accessed on 2014 Aug 23].  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Farook SA, Stokes RJ, Davis AK, Sneddon K, Collyer J. Use of dental loupes among dental trainers and trainees in the UK. J Investig Clin Dent 2013;4:120-3.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Theodore M. Roberson. Sturdevant′s Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 5 th ed. Mosby an imprint of Elsevier. St. Louis, Missori 63146.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Charbeneau GT. Principles and Practice of Operative Dentistry. 2 nd ed. Indian ed. Varghese publication House, Bombay 400 014.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Dimitrijevic T, Kahler B, Evans G, Collins M, Moule A. Depth and distance perception of dentists and dental students. Oper Dent 2011; 36:467-77.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Giuliani M, Lajolo C, Clemente L, Querqui A, Viotti R, Boari A, et al. Is manual dexterity essential in the selection of dental students? Br Dent J 2007;203:149-55.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Gansky SA, Pritchard H, Kahl E, Mendoza D, Bird W, Miller AJ, et al. Reliability and validity of a manual dexterity test to predict preclinical grades. J Dent Educ 2004;68:985-94.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Gillet D, Quinton A, Jeannel A. Is there a link between writing ability, drawing aptitude and manual skills of dental students? Eur J Dent Educ 2002;6:69-73.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Chadwick RG. Factors influencing dental students to attend for eye examination. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:72-4.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Forgie AH, Gearie T, Pine CM, Pitts NB. Visual standards in a sample of dentists working within Scotland. Prim Dent Care 2001;8:124-7.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Christensen GJ. Magnification in dentistry: Useful tool or another gimmick? J Am Dent Assoc 2003;134:1647-50.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Maggio MP, Villegas H, Blatz MB. The effect of magnification loupes on the performance of preclinical dental students. Quintessence Int 2011;42:45-55.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Eichenberger M, Perrin P, Neuhaus KW, Bringolf U, Lussi A. Influence of loupes and age on the near visual acuity of practicing dentists. J Biomed Opt 2011;16:035003.  Back to cited text no. 16
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mala Kundabala
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.159724

Rights and Permissions



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6]



 

Top
 
 
 
  Search
 
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  
 


    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusions
    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2540    
    Printed31    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded225    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal