Pictograph system for diagnosis making and data management in endodontics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14295/bds.2020.v23i4.2056Abstract
ABSTRACT
Objective: this questionnaire aimed to evaluate the approval of a new pictograph system for endodontic diagnosis by undergraduate and graduate students/endodontist instead of a conventional method. Methods: after a presentation to a total of 224 participants explaining the pictograph system, the participants (166 undergraduate students and 58 graduate students/endodontist) received a standardized questionnaire with three questions. The data were analyzed using the multprop macro basing on Tukey's test for multiple comparison with (P ? 0.05). The first question was to define the education level of the participants; the second question about which diagnosis method is preferred; and the third question about the intention of using one of the methods in the future. The questionnaire was realized in May 2019. The response rate was 97.7%. Results: the first question showed that 74.10% and 25.90% were undergraduate and graduate students/endodontist respectively. After statistical analysis there was no significant difference between the groups in the second and the third questions. In the second question (71.08% and 62.06%) of undergraduate and graduate student/endodontists respectively preferred the pictograph method over the conventional method. In the third question (60.24% and 51.72%) of undergraduate and graduate student/endodontists respectively showed interest in using the pictograph method in their professional career. Conclusion: the pictograph method in endodontic diagnosis is accepted by the majority of undergraduate and graduate students/endodontists. Training and experience affect the diagnosis making.
KEYWORDS
Advanced dental education; Continuing dental education; Endodontics; Pictograph
References
Torabinejad M, Goodacre CJ. Endodontic or dental implant therapy: the factors affecting treatment planning. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(7):973‐1028. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0318.
McCaul LK, McHugh S, Saunders WP. The influence of specialty training and experience on decision making in endodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Int Endod J. 2001 Dec;34(8):594–606. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00433.x.
Wenteler GL, Sathorn C, Parashos P. Factors influencing root canal retreatment strategies by general practitioners and specialists in Australia. Int Endod J. 2015 May;48(5):417–27. doi: 10.1111/iej.12330.
Zitzmann NU, Krastl G, Hecker H, Walter C, Waltimo T, Weiger R. Strategic considerations in treatment planning: Deciding when to treat, extract, or replace a questionable tooth. J Prosthet Dent. 2010 Aug;104(2):80–91. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60096-0.
Pagonis TC, Fong CD, Hasselgren G. Retreatment decisions--a comparison between general practitioners and endodontic postgraduates. J Endod. 2000;26(4):240‐1. doi:10.1097/00004770-200004000-00012
Dechouniotis G, Petridis XM, Georgopoulou MK. Influence of specialty training and experience on endodontic decision making. J Endod. 2010;36(7):1130‐4. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2010.03.023.
Rodríguez G, Abella F, Durán-Sindreu F, Patel S, Roig M. Influence of cone-beam computed tomography in clinical decision making among specialists. J Endod. 2017;43(2):194‐9. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.012.
Azarpazhooh A, Dao T, Ungar WJ, Da Costa J, Figueiredo R, Krahn M, et al. Patients' values related to treatment options for teeth with apical periodontitis. J Endod. 2016;42(3):365‐70. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2015.11.022.
Aminoshariae A, Teich S, Heima M, Kulild JC. The role of insurance and training in dental decision making. J Endod. 2014;40(8):1082‐6. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2014.05.007.
Kvist T, Heden G, Reit C. Endodontic retreatment strategies used by general dental practitioners. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004;97(4):502‐7. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2003.09.006.
Evans N, Hayes J. Textbook of Endodontology. Int Endod J. 2005 Dec;38(12):949. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.01039.x.
Inquimbert C, Tramini P, Romieu O, Giraudeau N. Pedagogical evaluation of digital technology to enhance dental student learning. Eur J Dent. 2019;13(1):53‐7. doi:10.1055/s-0039-1688526.
Gramling R, Anthony D, Frierson G, Bowen D. The cancer worry chart: a single-item screening measure of worry about developing breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2007;16(6):593‐7. doi:10.1002/pon.1128.
de Boer IR, Wesselink PR, Vervoorn JM. The creation of virtual teeth with and without tooth pathology for a virtual learning environment in dental education. Eur J Dent Educ. 2013;17(4):191‐7. doi:10.1111/eje.12027.
de Oliveira MLB, Verner FS, Kamburogğlu K, Silva JNN, Junqueira RB. Effectiveness of using a mobile app to improve dental students' ability to identify endodontic complications from periapical radiographs. J Dent Educ. 2019;83(9):1092‐9. doi:10.21815/JDE.019.099.
Ben‐Moshe L, Powell JJW. Sign of our times? Revis(it)ing the international symbol of access. Disabil Soc. 2007 Aug 31;22(5):489–505. doi: 10.1080/09687590701427602.
Abu Hasna A, Ferrari CH, Bittencourt TS, Camargo CHR, Carvalho CAT. Acting and knowledge of emergency rescue teams in dental trauma. Brazilian Dent Sci. 2019 Jul 30;22(3):329–34. doi: 10.14295/bds.2019.v22i3.1717.
Usher-Smith JA, Masson G, Mills K, Sharp SJ, Sutton S, Klein WMP, et al. A randomised controlled trial of the effect of providing online risk information and lifestyle advice for the most common preventable cancers: study protocol. BMC Public Health. 2018 Dec 26;18(1):796. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5712-2.
Kreuzmair C, Siegrist M, Keller C. Does iconicity in pictographs matter? the influence of iconicity and numeracy on information processing, decision making, and liking in an eye-tracking study. Risk Anal. 2017;37(3):546‐56. doi:10.1111/risa.12623.
Hamasaki T, Kato H, Kumagai T, Hagihara A. Association between dentist-dental hygienist communication and dental treatment outcomes. Health Commun. 2017;32(3):288‐97. doi:10.1080/10410236.2016.1138376.
Pineda K, Bueno R, Alvarado C, Abella F, Roig M, Duran-Sindreu F. Influence of academic training in endodontics and implantology on decision-making in undergraduate students. Aust Endod J. 2018;44(1):40‐5. doi:10.1111/aej.12208.
Barstow BA, Vice J, Bowman S, Mehta T, Kringen S, Axelson P, et al. Examining perceptions of existing and newly created accessibility symbols. Disabil Health J. 2019;12(2):180‐6. doi:10.1016/j.dhjo.2018.11.012.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
COPYRIGHT TRANSFER AND RESPONSIBILITY STATEMENT
(PDF)
For all articles published in the BDS journal, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open-access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted, provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work while ensuring that the authors receive proper credit. All metadata associated with published articles is released under the Creative Commons CC0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.
Before the submission, authors must obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables, or any extract of a text) that does not fall into the public domain or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyright holder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyright holder).
The authors hereby attest that the study is original and does not present manipulated data, fraud, or plagiarism. All names listed made a significant scientific contribution to the study, are aware of the presented data, and agree with the final version of the manuscript. They assume complete responsibility for the ethical aspects of the study.
This text must be printed and signed by all authors. The scanned version should be submitted as supplemental file during the submission process.
