Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Exodontia, or tooth extraction, is a fundamental skill for dentists, particularly in regions where specialized dental care may be less accessible. Assessments often rely on the examiner’s experience, employing arbitrary criteria such as the application of local anesthetic, hygiene, aseptic precautions, and proper instrument use. Such methods risk subjective bias, prioritizing different aspects based on the examiner’s perspective and potentially leading to inconsistent evaluations. The objective of the study was to assess the reliability and validity of the conventional methodology of assessment with a format-based assessment (FM) tool in evaluating exodontia skills.</p> Methods <p>Twenty students (n = 20) were randomly selected for the study. The conventional method (CM) assessments were given out of a total of 100 marks. To evaluate inter-item consistency, videos of the same procedure were randomly repeated for different examiners. The format-based assessment (FM) used two structured formats (a visual analog scale and an Assessment of Clinical Exodontia Skills (ACES) rating scale), with the formats slightly adjusted to suit the study’s requirements.</p> Results <p>The rating scale and VAS methods demonstrated higher reliability in evaluating the students’ exodontia skills compared to the conventional method, yielding significantly higher scores (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01).</p> Conclusion <p>Future research should explore the development and integration of hybrid assessment models that combine the objectivity of format-based tools with the holistic perspective of conventional methods.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of Methodologies for the Assessment of Clinical Ability in the Removal of Teeth Among Undergraduate Dental Students in India

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月12日

查看全文
  • Preeti Tiwari,
  • T. P. Chaturvedi,
  • Nishtha Chauhan,
  • Rathindra Nath Bera,
  • Mehul Shashikant Hirani

摘要

Introduction

Exodontia, or tooth extraction, is a fundamental skill for dentists, particularly in regions where specialized dental care may be less accessible. Assessments often rely on the examiner’s experience, employing arbitrary criteria such as the application of local anesthetic, hygiene, aseptic precautions, and proper instrument use. Such methods risk subjective bias, prioritizing different aspects based on the examiner’s perspective and potentially leading to inconsistent evaluations. The objective of the study was to assess the reliability and validity of the conventional methodology of assessment with a format-based assessment (FM) tool in evaluating exodontia skills.

Methods

Twenty students (n = 20) were randomly selected for the study. The conventional method (CM) assessments were given out of a total of 100 marks. To evaluate inter-item consistency, videos of the same procedure were randomly repeated for different examiners. The format-based assessment (FM) used two structured formats (a visual analog scale and an Assessment of Clinical Exodontia Skills (ACES) rating scale), with the formats slightly adjusted to suit the study’s requirements.

Results

The rating scale and VAS methods demonstrated higher reliability in evaluating the students’ exodontia skills compared to the conventional method, yielding significantly higher scores (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Future research should explore the development and integration of hybrid assessment models that combine the objectivity of format-based tools with the holistic perspective of conventional methods.