Tooth Wear Evaluation System 2.0-Evaluation of diagnostic reliability in the assessment of signs and symptoms for tooth wear by non-experts.

BACKGROUND: Tooth wear is a multifactorial condition that manifests through various signs and symptoms. These individual signs and symptoms were described in multiple studies, leading to the inclusion in TWES 2.0 (Tooth Wear Evaluation System 2.0) and the forthcoming DC-TW (Diagnostic Criteria for Tooth Wear). However, a study evaluating their reliability has yet to be conducted. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the reliability in the assessment of 6 signs of pathological tooth wear and 18 clinical signs and symptoms determining aetiology, all of which are included in the TWES 2.0/DC-TW. METHODS: 48 dental students (operators) evaluated patient cases from a patient pool of 14 patients on dental casts and high-resolution intraoral photographs. The agreement between all operators for each sign and symptom was calculated based on ICC (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients). Additionally, the agreement of each operator's evaluation with a predefined sample solution was calculated based on Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: Inter-user agreement ranged from near perfect (0.91) to poor (0.02) for the various pathology signs or aetiology symptoms of tooth wear (mean 0.32). The agreements of the operator's ratings compared to the sample solution resulted in Cohen's kappa from 0.18 to 1 (mean 0.59) for the pathology signs and ranged from 0.02 to 0.51 for the aetiology signs (mean 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: The reliability of the signs and symptoms examined and the ability of individual investigators to correctly identify and assign signs and symptoms varied widely. The current assessment tools for the qualification of tooth wear need further refinement, and examiners need intensive training in tooth wear assessment.

Freehand vs. depth-gauge rotary instruments for veneer preparation: A controlled randomized simulator study.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether depth-gauge burs in veneer preparations influence preparation depth in a randomized, controlled, single-blinded trial and whether inexperienced operators can perform adequate veneer preparations. METHODS: Participants were 20 undergraduate dental students with no prior veneer preparation experience. The instruments used were the "Laminate Veneer System" (LVS), "Keramik-Veneers. de" (KVD), and a "Freehand" group (FH) for reference. All participants prepared three educational acrylic resin maxillae and three mandibular central incisors mounted in typodonts in patient simulators. The objectives were to achieve a preparation depth of 0.6 mm (tooth 11) and 0.4 mm (tooth 31). The sequences of the instruments used and prepared teeth were randomized. The measurements were performed using a laser triangulation coordinate-measuring machine. The data were stratified according to tooth location. RESULTS: The preparation depths of both depth-gauge-instrument-groups LVS and KVD achieved the objectives significantly better than did the instruments from the "Freehand" group (P < 0.001). The differences between the depth gauge groups were insignificant, although the maximum preparation depths were smaller in the KVD group. Regarding the prepared teeth, the preparation depths in the mandibular incisors were lower, and the differences were smaller. CONCLUSIONS: The use of special depth-gauge burs for initial veneer preparation leads to significantly lower preparation depths than "Freehand" preparations. The tapered instruments resulted in a lower incidence of extreme preparation depths. The inexperienced operators performed veneer preparation remarkably well.

Condylar motion analysis: a controlled, blinded clinical study on the interindividual reproducibility of standardized evaluation of computer-recorded condylar movements.

The present study investigated to what extent a systematic evaluation of electronic condylar motion recordings leads to reproducible results in different examiners. The study was based on the anonymized condylar motion recordings of 20 patients (Cadiax compact II system). These were recruited consecutively from the examinations in a center specializing in diagnosing and managing temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Four trained practitioners independently evaluated the identical movement recordings of all patients after calibration. The evaluation was based on the previously published evaluation system. The results were recorded digitally in a database. The findings were then compared, and the matching values were determined (Fleiss' Kappa). The evaluation, according to Fleiss' Kappa, showed that the consistency of the assessment of the findings among the examiners is excellent (mean value 0.88, p < 0.00001). The study shows that calibrated dentists achieved reproducible results using this evaluation system and computer-assisted reporting. Good reproducibility confirms the reliability of systematic evaluation of clinical motion analysis. The ambiguities uncovered and eliminated in the study should avoid misunderstandings in the future. Both factors establish the prerequisites for applying condylar motion analysis in clinical practice.

Tooth Wear Evaluation System (TWES) 2.0-Reliability of diagnosis with and without computer-assisted evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Tooth wear is a multifactorial process, leading to the loss of dental hard tissues. Therefore, it is important to detect the level of tooth wear at an early stage, so monitoring can be initiated. The Tooth Wear Evaluation System (TWES) enables such a multistage diagnosis of tooth wear. The further developed TWES 2.0 contains a complete taxonomy of tooth wear, but its reliability has not yet been validated. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) whether diagnoses made based on the TWES 2.0 are reproducible and whether this reproducibility is also achieved with computer-assisted diagnostics. METHODS: 44 dental students received extensive training in TWES 2.0 assessment and taxonomy. The students each evaluated at least 10 (of the present 14) anonymised patient cases using gypsum models and high-resolution intra-oral photographs according to TWES 2.0. One half initially evaluated on paper; the other half used dedicated software (CMDfact / CMDbrux). After half of the patient cases (5), the evaluation methods were switched (AB/BA crossover design). The diagnoses were then evaluated for agreement with the predefined sample solution. RESULTS: Evaluation of agreement with the sample solution according to Cohen's kappa indicated a value of 0.46 for manual (traditional) evaluation; and 0.44 for computer-assisted evaluation. Evaluation of agreement between examiners was 0.38 for manual and 0.48 for computer-assisted evaluation (Fleiss' kappa). CONCLUSION: The results of this study proved that the taxonomy of the TWES 2.0 has acceptable reliability and can thus be used by dentists. Accordingly, the system can be learned quickly even by untrained practitioners. Comparable results are achieved with computer-assisted evaluation.