To the content
Спецвыпуск . 2022

COMPUTERIZED VIRTUAL REALITY SIMULATION IN PRECLINICAL DENTISTRY: CAN A COMPUTERIZED SIMULATOR REPLACE THE CONVENTIONAL PHANTOM HEADS AND HUMAN INSTRUCTION?

Abstract

In preclinical dental education, the acquisition of clinical, technical skills, and the transfer of these skills to the clinic are paramount. Phantom heads provide an efficient way to teach preclinical students dental procedures safely while increasing their dexterity skills considerably. Modern computerized phantom head training units incorporate features of virtual reality technology and the ability to offer concurrent augmented feedback. The aims of this review were to examine and evaluate the dental literature for evidence supporting their use and to discuss the role of augmented feedback versus the facilitator's instruction. Adjunctive training in these units seems to enhance student's learning and skill acquisition and reduce the required faculty supervision time. However, the virtual augmented feedback cannot be used as the sole method of feedback, and the facilitator's input is still critical. Well-powered longitudinal randomized trials exploring the impact of these units on student's clinical performance and issues of cost-effectiveness are warranted.

Keywords:dental education, faculty, simulation training

REFERENCES

1. Duta M.A., Bogdan C.M., Popovici D.M., et al. An overview of virtual and augmented reality in dental education. Oral Health Dent Manage. 2011; 10: 42-9.

2. LeBlanc V.R., Urbankova A., Hadavi F., Lichtenthal R.M. A preliminary study in using virtual reality to train dental students. J Dent Educ. 2004; 68: 378-83.

3. Suvinen T.I., Messer L.B., Franco E. Clinical simulation in teaching preclinical dentistry. Eur J Dent Educ. 1998; 2: 25-32.

4. Fugill M. Defining the purpose of phantom head. Eur J Dent Educ. 2013; 17: e1-4.

5. Kapoor S., Arora P., Kapoor V., Jayachandran M., et al. Haptics - touchfeedback technology widening the horizon of medicine. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014; 8: 294-9.

6. Buchanan J.A. Use of simulation technology in dental education. J Dent Educ 2001; 65: 1225-31.

7. Wierinck E., Puttemans V., van Steenberghe D. Effect of reducing frequency of augmented feedback on manual dexterity training and its retention. J Dent. 2006; 34: 641-7.

8. Wierinck E.R., Puttemans V., Swinnen S.P., van Steenberghe D. Expert performance on a virtual reality simulation system. J Dent Educ. 2007; 71: 759-66.

9. Kikuchi H., Ikeda M., Araki K. Evaluation of a virtual reality simulation system for porcelain fused to metal crown preparation at Tokyo Medical and Dental University. J Dent Educ 2013; 77: 782-92.

10. Rees J.S., Jenkins S.M., James T., et al. An initial evaluation of virtual reality simulation in teaching pre­clinical operative dentistry in a UK setting. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2007; 15: 89-92.

11. Welk A., Maggio M.P., Simon J.F., et al. Computer-assisted learning and simulation lab with 40 DentSim units. Int J Comput Dent. 2008; 11: 17-40.

12. Urbankova A. Impact of computerized dental simulation training on preclinical operative dentistry examination scores. J Dent Educ. 2010; 74: 402-9.

13. Quinn F., Keogh P., McDonald A., Hussey D. A pilot study comparing the effectiveness of conventional training and virtual reality simulation in the skills acquisition of junior dental students. Eur J Dent Educ. 2003; 7: 13-9.

14. Buchanan J.A. Experience with virtual reality-based technology in teaching restorative dental procedures. J Dent Educ. 2004; 68: 1258-65.

15. Jasinevicius T.R., Landers M., Nelson S., Urbankova A. An evaluation of two dental simulation systems: virtual reality versus contemporary non-computer-assisted. J Dent Educ. 2004; 68: 1 151-62.

16. Quinn F., Keogh P., McDonald A., Hussey D. A study comparing the effectiveness of conventional training and virtual reality simulation in the skills acquisition of junior dental students. Eur J Dent Educ. 2003; 7: 164-9.

17. Wierinck E., Puttemans V., Swinnen S., van Steenberghe D. Effect of augmented visual feedback from a virtual reality simulation system on manual dexterity training. Eur J Dent Educ. 2005; 9: 10-6.

18. Maggio M.P., Berthold P., Gottlieb R. Curriculum changes in preclinical laboratory education with virtual reality-based technology training. J Dent Educ. 2005; 69: 160.

19. Maggio M.P., Berthold P., Gottlieb R. Virtual Reality-Based Technology (VRBT) training positively enhances performance on preclinical practical examinations. J Dent Educ. 2005; 69: 161.

20. Cheng A., Kessler D., Mackinnon R., et al. Reporting guidelines for health care simulation research: extensions to the CONSORT and STROBE statements. Simul Healthc. 2016; 1 1: 238-48.

21. Cook D.A., Hatala R., Brydges R., et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011; 306: 978-88.

22. Larsen C.R., Oestergaard J., Ottesen B.S., Soerensen J.L. The efficacy of virtual reality simulation training in laparoscopy: a systematic review of randomized trials. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2012; 91: 1015-28.

23. Gurusamy K., Aggarwal R., Palanivelu L., Davidson B.R. Systematic review of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of virtual reality training for laparoscopic surgery. Br J Surg. 2008; 95: 1088-97.

24. Ikonen T.S., Antikainen T., Silvennoinen M., Isojarvi J., et al. Virtual reality simulator training of laparoscopic cholecystectomies - a systematic review. Scand J Surg. 2012; 101: 5-12.

25. Piromchai P., Avery A., Laopaiboon M., Kennedy G., et al. Virtual reality training for improving the skills needed for performing surgery of the ear, nose or throat. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015: CD010198.

26. Walsh C.M., Sherlock M.E., Ling S.C., Carnahan H. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012: CD008237.

27. Palter V.N., Grantcharov T.P. Virtual reality in surgical skills training. Surg Clin North Am. 2010; 90: 605-17.

28. Dawe S.R., Windsor J.A., Broeders J.A., Cregan P.C., et al. A systematic review of surgical skills transfer after simulation-based training: laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopy. Ann Surg. 2014; 259: 236-48.

29. Kennedy C.C., Maldonado F., Cook D.A. Simulation-based bronchoscopy training: systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2013; 144: 183-92.

30. Hatala R., Cook D.A., Zendejas B., Hamstra S.J., et al. Feedback for simulation-based procedural skills training: a meta-analysis and critical narrative synthesis. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2014; 19: 251-72.

31. Salmoni A.W., Schmidt R.A., Walter C.B. Knowledge of results and motor learning: a review and critical reappraisal. Psychol Bull. 1984; 95: 355-86.

32. Van Merrienboer J.J., Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and complex learning: recent developments and future directions. Educ Psychol Rev. 2005; 17: 147-77.

33. Winstein C.J., Schmidt R.A. Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1990; 16: 677-91.

34. Sevdalis N., Nestel D., Kardong-Edgren S., Gaba D.M. A joint leap into a future of high-quality simulation research-standardizing the reporting of simulation science. Simul Healthc. 2016; 1 1: 236-7.

All articles in our journal are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0 license)

CHIEF EDITOR
CHIEF EDITOR
Balkizov Zalim Zamirovich
Secretary General of the Russian Society of Medical Education Specialists, Director of the Institute of Training of Medical Education Specialists of the Russian Medical Academy of Continuing Professional Education, 125993, Moscow, Russian Federation, Professor of the Department of Vocational Education and Educational Technologies of the N.I. Pirogov RNIMU of the MOH of Russia, CEO of GEOTAR-Med, Advisor President of the National Medical Chamber, Moscow, Russian Federation

Journals of «GEOTAR-Media»