Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic Blocks
<b>Background:</b> The shaping of root canal space was completed using manual stainless steel files in earlier decades and with the advent of mechanical nickel–titanium (NiTi) instruments, there is potential for more efficient root canal preparation. Despite the advantages of NiTi instru...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2024-11-01
|
| Series: | Dentistry Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/12/11/363 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850267614532599808 |
|---|---|
| author | António Ginjeira Abayomi O. Baruwa Karla Baumotte |
| author_facet | António Ginjeira Abayomi O. Baruwa Karla Baumotte |
| author_sort | António Ginjeira |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <b>Background:</b> The shaping of root canal space was completed using manual stainless steel files in earlier decades and with the advent of mechanical nickel–titanium (NiTi) instruments, there is potential for more efficient root canal preparation. Despite the advantages of NiTi instruments, their adoption in undergraduate dental education remains limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate three root canal instrumentation techniques, manual instrumentation using stainless steel hand files, continuous rotation employing ProTaper Gold (PTG) files, and reciprocation with WaveOne Gold (WOG) files, on endodontic resin blocks to assess the quality of preparation and the time required for instrumentation. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 36 third-year dental students, all lacking prior experience in root canal procedures, were divided into six groups to prepare 108 resin endodontic blocks with each student preparing 3 blocks. Images were captured at the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative stages to facilitate comparisons and measurements of the prepared blocks to assess the degree of resin removal, apical deviation, and mid-cervical wear. Furthermore, questionnaires were distributed to assess the students’ experiences and satisfaction with the techniques. The Friedman test, Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction, and Kruskal–Wallis test with Mann–Whitney U test were used to analyse and compare techniques, with the level of significance set at <i>p</i> < 0.05. <b>Results</b>: Instrumentation with PTG exhibited significantly reduced apical deviation (0.073 ± 0.003) compared to both the WOG and manual instrumentations (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Significant differences in mid-cervical wear were observed only between PTG and the manual instrumentation. In terms of resin removal, the manual instrumentation displayed greater variability and was five times slower to complete the instrumentation. In total, 90% of students favoured mechanical instrumentation, with substantial preferences for them over manual techniques. <b>Conclusions</b>: Mechanical instrumentation techniques, notably with the PTG system, were significantly faster and more effective in preparation quality. This highlights the potential for the inclusion of mechanical instrumentation in undergraduate dental curricula. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-4774ef31b0c049a4b5ff255aa84264e2 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2304-6767 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-11-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Dentistry Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-4774ef31b0c049a4b5ff255aa84264e22025-08-20T01:53:44ZengMDPI AGDentistry Journal2304-67672024-11-01121136310.3390/dj12110363Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic BlocksAntónio Ginjeira0Abayomi O. Baruwa1Karla Baumotte2Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1600-277 Lisboa, PortugalFaculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1600-277 Lisboa, PortugalFaculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1600-277 Lisboa, Portugal<b>Background:</b> The shaping of root canal space was completed using manual stainless steel files in earlier decades and with the advent of mechanical nickel–titanium (NiTi) instruments, there is potential for more efficient root canal preparation. Despite the advantages of NiTi instruments, their adoption in undergraduate dental education remains limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate three root canal instrumentation techniques, manual instrumentation using stainless steel hand files, continuous rotation employing ProTaper Gold (PTG) files, and reciprocation with WaveOne Gold (WOG) files, on endodontic resin blocks to assess the quality of preparation and the time required for instrumentation. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 36 third-year dental students, all lacking prior experience in root canal procedures, were divided into six groups to prepare 108 resin endodontic blocks with each student preparing 3 blocks. Images were captured at the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative stages to facilitate comparisons and measurements of the prepared blocks to assess the degree of resin removal, apical deviation, and mid-cervical wear. Furthermore, questionnaires were distributed to assess the students’ experiences and satisfaction with the techniques. The Friedman test, Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction, and Kruskal–Wallis test with Mann–Whitney U test were used to analyse and compare techniques, with the level of significance set at <i>p</i> < 0.05. <b>Results</b>: Instrumentation with PTG exhibited significantly reduced apical deviation (0.073 ± 0.003) compared to both the WOG and manual instrumentations (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Significant differences in mid-cervical wear were observed only between PTG and the manual instrumentation. In terms of resin removal, the manual instrumentation displayed greater variability and was five times slower to complete the instrumentation. In total, 90% of students favoured mechanical instrumentation, with substantial preferences for them over manual techniques. <b>Conclusions</b>: Mechanical instrumentation techniques, notably with the PTG system, were significantly faster and more effective in preparation quality. This highlights the potential for the inclusion of mechanical instrumentation in undergraduate dental curricula.https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/12/11/363endodonticsdental studentsdental educationnickel–titaniumstainless steel |
| spellingShingle | António Ginjeira Abayomi O. Baruwa Karla Baumotte Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic Blocks Dentistry Journal endodontics dental students dental education nickel–titanium stainless steel |
| title | Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic Blocks |
| title_full | Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic Blocks |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic Blocks |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic Blocks |
| title_short | Evaluation and Comparison of Manual and Mechanical Endodontic Instrumentation Completed by Undergraduate Dental Students on Endodontic Blocks |
| title_sort | evaluation and comparison of manual and mechanical endodontic instrumentation completed by undergraduate dental students on endodontic blocks |
| topic | endodontics dental students dental education nickel–titanium stainless steel |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/12/11/363 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT antonioginjeira evaluationandcomparisonofmanualandmechanicalendodonticinstrumentationcompletedbyundergraduatedentalstudentsonendodonticblocks AT abayomiobaruwa evaluationandcomparisonofmanualandmechanicalendodonticinstrumentationcompletedbyundergraduatedentalstudentsonendodonticblocks AT karlabaumotte evaluationandcomparisonofmanualandmechanicalendodonticinstrumentationcompletedbyundergraduatedentalstudentsonendodonticblocks |