You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Applied Sciences
Download PDF
  • Review
  • Open Access

30 October 2021

Significance of Haptic and Virtual Reality Simulation (VRS) in the Dental Education: A Review of Literature

,
and
1
Department of Dental Materials, HITEC Dental College, Institute of Medical Sciences, Taxilla 751010, Pakistan
2
Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia
3
Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Implantology, College of Dentistry, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci.2021, 11(21), 10196;https://doi.org/10.3390/app112110196
This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Augmented Medicine
Version Notes
Order Reprints

Abstract

The significance of haptic and virtual reality (VR) has been acknowledged by eminent dental professionals and has transformed dental teaching in the modern dental world. With this novel technological concept, students can interact with digital simulation on the screen and learn treatment skills before transferring them to real situations. This is helpful for gaining skills confidence, revising exercises again and again without the waste of materials, and for student assessment controlled by a teacher or tutor. It is a promising technology to enhance dental education for the new era of post COVID-19 practice due to noncontact patient training environments. It can create a safe learning environment for the teacher and learner or participant. The prospect of this literature review is to highlight the significance and clinical applications of virtual reality and simulations in undergraduate dental education.

1. Introduction

Simulation, an approximative imitation of a real system, is a constructive learning strategy which was introduced in the healthcare system for patient safety while assisting the operators to be confident before performing their first procedures [1]. Since the 18th century, humans have been in pursuit of seeking simulation techniques to facilitate learning strategies in affective, cognitive, and psychomotor disciplines, constituting a diversity of activities for novices, learners, or experts. Figure 1 illustrates the antecedent simulators used along with the advancements made in the modern era and the factors which led to their development [2].
Figure 1. Illustration representing the antecedent simulators along with the modern era simulators.
Simulations in dental education date back to 1990s [3]. Currently, the utilization of robotics and haptics simulations with the evolution of virtual reality has revolutionized dental studies. Virtual reality (VR) offers a promising future in dental education and is attracting global attention as it provides an exceptional training environment along with instant feedback facility, thus creating tremendous opportunities for students to acquire standardized skills [4]. Figure 2 illustrates the advantages of virtual reality simulation in dental education.
Figure 2. Advantages of virtual reality simulation in dental education [3,5,6,7].
The fundamental principle behind simulations involves the use of software technology to produce images (while another domain of VR, categorized as haptics, deals with sensations such as sounds, pressure, and vibrations, thus creating an imaginary environment for the user) [8]. Given the irreversible nature of human teeth, competency of dental students prior to basic dental procedures including root canal therapy, crown cutting, or oral surgeries is of immense importance. Thus, a virtual environment established by three dimensional (3-D) technology is an essential tool for effectively delivering psychomotor skills to undergraduate dental students as it provides an avenue to augment their diagnostic skills along with efficient treatment planning [9].
Additionally, VR-based dental simulations also prevent the operator from clinical catastrophes such as a prick from an infected needle or sharp instruments, hence providing them with ample time to get familiar with the tools and practice clinical procedures without supervision. Raghav et al. reported the efficacy of VR exposure therapy (VRET) for treating dental phobia. This therapy is quite useful in treating dental phobia and anxiety for dental treatments. Regrettably, as yet there is a dearth of content and trained facilitators in the majority of dental schools (mostly due to the massive initial investment required) [6]. Table 1 provides a description of commercially available dental virtual reality-based simulators with their complete software and hardware details. This young generation is more technology oriented and learn skills more quickly than by conventional methods. We all are currently in the era of digitalization where everything is going to be digitalized.
Table 1. Comparison of commercially available dental simulators. (Adapted and modified from the E. Roy et al. [10]).
Currently, the role of technology-enhanced and simulations-based learning as an essential tool for delivering dental education is acknowledged across the globe. Since the beginning of training, dental practitioners are expected to develop high psychomotor skills to be proficient clinicians. However, technological advancements are required in this field with an aspiration of increasing the learning curve before working on a patient [16]. Simple phantom-head simulators are helpful for psychomotor skills but explorations with hand-eye coordination along with motor skills hold immense importance. In reality, a lot of expenses are required for the maintenance of this system, including waste management and the expensive materials required for teaching students. Phantom-head dental simulators are not working on green dentistry or eco-friendly principles. Hence, incorporation of haptic training devices or virtual reality simulators (VRS) in delivering dental education is effective and provide a feedback mechanism proposed for the refinement of manual dexterity [17]. These devices replicate a real environment for its users, allowing them to touch and feel surrounding structures [18]. Dental operators with the aid of a virtual reality test systems do not only prepare students for dental competencies but also emphasize target appraisal based competencies [19]. Learner skill assessment is mainly accompanied by having a specialist supervisor who observes the procedure with the final result achieved conventionally. However, there is a limitation of human expert assessment. By VR simulators, all of the aspects of the operator’s work can be collected and summarized during the simulation activity and further analyzed to provide a more appropriate objective assessment and feedback. Primarily the term haptic is also recognized as a cutting edge technology [20] and connects an individual with a computer and simultaneously provides tactile feedback. The operator applies divergent forces along the axis and obtains feedback [20]. Figure 3 shows various commercially available dental simulators.
Figure 3. Different type of commercialized simulators in dental education trainings: (A) SIMtoCARE, (B) Model T- Uni Sim, (C) Model L—Uni Sim, (D) Virteasy Dental, and (E) SIMtoCARE.
Consolidation of a haptic device in a training system as part of an undergraduate curriculum permits the users to practice a variety of dental procedures in a virtual 3D environment where they can touch or feel the objects, thereby creating more realistic conditions [21]. In the modern dental era, facilitators have an extensive array of haptic devices for every field of undergraduate dental studies with their pros and cons and different principles according to their applications. The categorization of dental simulators and their applications according to the dental departments are discussed in Figure 4 [8].
Figure 4. Classification of simulators based on their application in dental departments.

2. Virtual Reality in Periodontology (Gum Diseases)

To understand the practicality for the utilization of a virtual reality simulator, it is essential to seek the foundations of diagnosing periodontal disease. Periodontal disease as newly classified as, “a chronic multifactorial inflammatory disease associated with dysbiotic plaque biofilms and characterized by progressive destruction of the tooth-supporting apparatus” [22]. The initial characteristics include loss of periodontal tissue support and bone loss, which may be assessed radiographically by the appearance of periodontal pocketing along with gingival bleeding. Other features include the presence of plaque/calculus and gingival inflammation. The biomarkers of periodontal probing pocket depth (PPD) and percentage bleeding on probing (BoP) are important parameters in classifying the disease and are dependent on the skills of a dentist.
The measurement of these parameters involves the use of a periodontal probes [23]. These instruments require careful probing of the gingival sulcus around six areas per tooth with a standard pressure of 0.25 Newton (N) to chart the pockets. The probing pressure required to measure peri-implant disease is further reduced to 0.15 N [24]. Thus, motor skills and tactile perception of the gingival sulcus by the dentist are paramount in aiding diagnosis of diseases. Furthermore, the removal of plaque/calculus by mechanical or ultra-sonic means also involves operator variability. The removal of calculus during non-surgical periodontal therapy also requires the operator to be alert with his perceptions of sub-gingival plaque or calculus. Traditional interventions allowed for the utilization of models or animal heads for the development of periodontal skills such as tissue handling and flap surgeries. However, in the modern era, various studies have reported success in using a virtual reality-based computer system. In Table 2, a detailed description of the reported studies is mentioned. A haptic virtual reality simulator system (PerioSim®) was introduced by Steinberg et al. in 2007, the idea of which was taken from another audio-visual reality simulator called DentiSim [25]. PerioSim® introduced the haptic “touch to feel” sensation by having a stylus to interact with a physical dental model which is then portrayed visually in 3D. The result of the study indicated that it increased the students’ tactile ability (although the representation of gingiva could not be registered into the system and some limitations were observed). Similarly, Koesnikov et al. introduced a haptic feedback system which registered pressure and pathway demonstrations [26]. Although it improved the tactile perceptions of its users, the accurate reconstruction of gingiva could not be registered into the system. Furthermore, Yamaguchi et al. also proposed a haptic feedback virtual reality system which was specifically designed for periodontology [27]. It involved the simulation of probing skills and caries removal. The results obtained from his study indicated remarkable improvement in students’ perception and tactile ability to replicate performances, but the system could not fully replicate the environment of a clinical setting or cutting instrument. The major advantage which was seen as being common in all the aforementioned studies was the improved tactile perception and ability of a student to detect and appreciate the anatomical considerations. Another advantage was that these virtual reality systems were less time consuming than conventional training classes. Considering that drawbacks in delivering pristine education can sometimes occur due to tight schedules and lower strength of professional faculty available, these systems can prove to be useful as they do not require more training staff and are self-explanatory in their use. Despite all the benefits of this technology, the major drawback is the cost-effectiveness of the devices. Considering that majority of the devices have been unable to reproduce the accurate 3D models of soft tissue owing to the morphology of the soft tissue itself, teaching hospitals in developing countries are unable to use this technology.
Table 2. Applications of virtual reality (VR) simulation in periodontology.

3. Virtual Reality (VR) Simulation in Restorative Dentistry (Dental Caries Management)

A preeminent emerging trend to train students for operative procedures and the development of psychomotor skills is the use of virtual reality in dental education [16,29]. Restorative dentistry revolves replacing a diseased part of tooth structure followed by restoration, thus developing restorative competency by practicing standard geometrical features for cavity preparation followed by proper placement of restorative materials. This forms an integral part of training inspiring dentists. The role of VR simulators is essential in the restorative dentistry since it is incorporated in the undergraduate curriculum much earlier in contrast to other preclinical courses [29]. Conventional restorative training involved the use of manikins that helped in positioning and mimicked the general anatomy. However, the difference in mechanical properties of plastic teeth in contrast to real ones along with changes in hardness due to carious lesions could not be simulated in conventional manikins [27]. The emergence of computer-assisted simulations revolutionized undergraduate dental training [18,30].
Virtual reality (VR) in restorative dentistry and endodontics offers the prospect of creating a digital environment for its users to perform various exercises such as cavity preparation (by providing multiple magnified images), caries evacuation, and light-curing techniques [31]. Additional features such as simulation fidelity integrated the simulation device with the proposed learning objectives. “Real-time feedback” allowed students to practice independently and gave a standardized assessment of their work [16,30]. For individual evaluation, the feature also allowed the recording of the training session [32]. Validity and follow up studies reported significant improvements in novice dental students trained with VR technology. Quinn et al. conducted a study to compare conventional training with virtual reality simulation among dental students in terms of outline, cavity depth, and smoothness, retention, and angulation of margins [33]. Students trained with VR simulators performed better when evaluated for cavity shape, depth, and smoothness while the results for retention and margin angulation were the same among both study groups. Jasinevicius et al. in another novel study concluded that students can be trained five times more promptly in contrast to traditional exercising [18]. Other preliminary studies are listed in Table 3. Therefore, there is a need to integrate VR simulation-based learning in the curriculum, as this would empower students with an option of self-learning which could instantly be evaluated thus saving the instructor’s time. These studies showed that the VR simulation improved the handling skills and help in transferring skills in clinical practice. Recently, the reliability and clinically relevant assessment via virtual reality has been proven by Jonathan et al. [15] on the commercially available VIRTEASY Dental©. In this study, assessment criteria for cavity preparation are optimized and qualitative analysis was conducted. The finding of the study provides a detailed proof of concept for validating the assessment carried out by VR dental simulators.
Table 3. Application of virtual reality (VR) simulation education in the restorative dentistry and endodontics.

4. Virtual Reality in Maxillo-Facial Surgery

Advancements in simulation-based education allowed learners to practice and opened opportunities for professionals to plan a wide array of surgical procedures. Its applications vary from evaluating accuracy for orthognathic surgery [42], obtaining a perfect match of virtual planes for jaw reconstruction [43], to correct placement of dental implants by guiding its direction and proximity with other important structures [44]. Virtual planning of implants has revolutionized implant dentistry as it has the potential for treating complex cases in immunocompromised patients with least invasive surgical procedure. Dynamic navigation or static guide approaches are utilized to transfer 3D virtual planning onto the surgical field [45]. Dynamic navigation has an advantage over the latter technique as it aids in adjusting the implant’s direction in a flexible manner using virtual planning. Established on the virtual designing, static transfer of plan involves fabrication of surgical guide followed by the use of CAD/CAM for implant insertion. In accordance with the type of support (such as dental, mucosal, or bony support), numerous types of surgical guides are accessible to obtain an exceptional accuracy [46].
Formerly, accessibility of computer programs enabled its users to determine the position of dental implant [47,48] but these programs lacked the potential to give the bone drilling feel to its users [49]. However, initiation of virtual reality simulation (VRS) in the training programs offered opportunities and enabled its users to have a perception of touch along with sight [50]. The system proved to be beneficial for evaluating intimate details of the procedures performed and therefore imparts a rigorous assessment [51]. The haptic devices used in the VRS allows its users to detect the texture of the surrounding soft tissues or bone handling drill, consequently preparing them for real case scenarios [52]. Similarly, orthognathic surgery involving the use of navigation in a virtual environment gave remarkable accuracy in patients. Preoperative simulations comprising of navigation system were utilized to perform the surgeries which included fractures, TMJ ankylosis, cleft lip repair [53], fibrous dysplasia, mandibular hypertrophy, and tumors [54,55].
Literature mentions the significance of virtual reality simulation for the standardization of dental education and need of more studies to optimize the value, assessment method, student feedback, and mechanism of integration in dental curriculum. Numerous methods have been proposed to motivate students towards self-learning thus reducing the faculty time and ameliorating their training skills. Various simulators have been introduced including VOXEL-MAN® simulators, which enabled its users to self-assess themselves, validate their training, and represent a safe, realistic, non-destructive, easily accessible surgical anatomy for junior’s resident. It is also low cost. Along with their skill refinement, the majority emphasized the training of technical skills. However, there exists a gap in these simulator models in terms of non-technical skills, thus creating problems for its users while working in stressful environments such as operation theatres. In Table 4, discussion of the reported studies on the applications of VR-based simulators for the oral and maxillofacial surgery.
Table 4. Application of virtual reality simulation (VRS) in oral and maxillofacial surgery.

5. Virtual Reality Simulation (VRS) in Prosthodontics (Crown & Fixed Partial Denture)

Prosthetic dentistry is a diverse domain offering specialized procedures for the replacement of missing teeth or facial structures. Fixed prosthesis involves cementation of crowns or bridges, while removable prosthesis includes complete or partial dentures. Substantial loss of tooth or bone necessitates the need for a complex prosthodontic procedure with minimum damage to other surrounding tissues. Therefore, a dynamic treatment approach is required. Morphological features, functional problems, and esthetics are some of the essential parameters which need comprehensive care by a prosthodontist for lucrative occlusal reconstruction and simultaneously use them to make a coherent procedure plan [60].
The complexity of prosthetic procedures requires significant precision, and therefore the concept of creating digital clinical scenarios is extremely beneficial (especially during undergraduate programs). Experimental trials using virtual reality simulators such as IDEA for bridge removal or DentSim™ ® for crown and bridge exercises demonstrated significant improvement in the scores of students in various clinical applications of prosthodontics [12,13,61]. The virtual reality simulators introduced enabled students to keep a record of their progress while simultaneously viewing their cases, thereby offering promising results during the training process. Another salient feature of the system was its ability to produce sound alerts if the user errs during the procedure (for instance, cutting an adjacent sound tooth), thereby providing instant feedback and evaluating their performance. This feedback evaluation eventually curtails the load on teaching assistants and offered the potential not merely for students but also for a specialist to ameliorate their clinical skills [62]. Fenney et al. proposed that virtual reality dental simulation increased student’s curiosity and eagerness to learn [63] while the obstacles regarding the conventional dental training programs were discussed by Esser et al., who spotlighted the significance of VRS in undergraduate dental education [64].
Established on student scores and preparation time, Kikuchi et al. evaluated the skills acquired using Dentsim™ for porcelain fused to metal crown preparation. The virtual reality simulator was incorporated with a real-time image processor which enabled learners to look and evaluate their preparations on a monitor. His findings suggest that the VRS system improved the crown preparation skills of students and reduced the procedural time in contrast to other groups [62]. In another educational study investigated and compared the differences in clinical skills of experts while the experimental group constituted students who were trained by Phantom Omni haptic system (SensAble Inc., Silicon Valley, CA, USA), the two groups were eventually graded by an expert. The calculation of scores was based on three parameters which included the time taken to perform the crown preparation, the force used, and the bur angulation. His findings suggest that the VRS used had the ability to differentiate between novice and experts [61]. Other experimental studies are summarized in Table 5. After overviewing, they reported that studies on the quality of crown preparation were good when instructed by VR dental simulators and were less time consuming as well. Student can easily revise the exercise many times (as per the needs of their course).
Table 5. Application of virtual reality simulation (VRS) in prosthodontics.

6. Significance of Technology Enhanced Simulation Education in Dentistry

VR creates an opportunity for practitioners to practice safe dentistry in a virtually realistic environment along with providing constant feedback. Dental simulators impersonate anatomical structures along with re-creating all the tactile sensations. In recent years, studies have signified positive repercussions of VR and simulators for patients by paving a way to view a panorama of a different world. This facilitates the calming down of apprehensive patients and has manifested positive outcomes by eliminating their sense of fear or pain. Consequently, further advance treatment could be scheduled. The evolution of technology in the modern world has made VR simulation-based teaching an integral part of learning for both undergraduate and post-graduate students. Moreover, in the COVID-19 era where social distancing is a necessity, dental training should be practiced in a way to protect students Therefore, institutes should emphasize the significance of simulators. Haptic machines offer students the opportunity to practice a diverse range of clinical skills in a safe environment and augment their confidence before shifting to patients (which has also served well in patients’ interests) [8]. Granting that present simulators lack the competency to challenge traditional dental training for some clinical fields, they still carry immense importance and studies have documented their effectiveness. However, further exploration is essential to ameliorate force feedback and video transmission ability of simulators. To facilitate dental students to practice various clinical procedures independently, it is definitely recommended to combine simulators with 5G and cloud computing technology [15,16]. Therefore, this review aims to persuade researchers to further investigate in this field while assuring trainers the significance of VR in dental training.

7. Conclusions

A paucity of standardization in the dental education system globally acts as a stumbling block in producing the finest dental practitioners. The aim of incorporating these novel technologies such as virtual and haptic simulator in dental education is to guide and help student development through different levels from beginners to competent experts. Therefore, expert clinicians can be trained by a continuous practice which improves their skills in various procedures such tooth preparation, cavity preparation, periodontal diagnosis, prosthetic fabrication and surgical procedures such as implant placement by increasing their ability of tactile sensation with feedback mechanism before proceeding to work in patient’s oral cavity. Another objective of replacing traditional phantom head-based training with VR is to reduce the material waste and cost spending on it. VR simulation labs do not require additional water sewerage pipelines or monthly maintainece which cost a lot to dental institutes and stakeholders. It has been proven that VR based dental education provides the good transfer of psychomotor skills to students while evaluating patients and managing clinical situations.
Based on standard practices for delivering dental education, various limitations exist which needs to be addressed. In essence, a limited number of studies have investigated the definite impact of incorporating the dental virtual reality simulators in the curriculum due to low educational standards, unclear scoring mechanisms, problems integrating this technology in dental curricula, and student or teacher feedback mechanisms. The models investigated in randomized studies so far have essentially focused on technical skills, therefore creating a gap in practicing of the non-technical skills. Thus, there is a need to bridge this gap in modern simulations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Z.K.; methodology, Z.K. and E.I.; software, N.A.; validation, Z.K., E.I. and N.A.; formal analysis, Z.K.; investigation, Z.K. and E.I.; resources, N.A.; data curation, Z.K. and N.A.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.K., E.I. and N.A.; writing—review and editing, N.A.; supervision, N.A.; project administration, N.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Pawar, A.M. Simulation in Dentistry. EC Dent. Sci. 2017, 3, 115–121. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ker, J.; Bradley, P. Simulation in Medical Education. Underst. Med. Educ. Evid. Theory Pract. 2010, 164–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Perry, S.; Bridges, S.M.; Burrow, M.F. A review of the use of simulation in dental education. Simul. Healthc. 2015, 10, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Plessas, A. Computerized Virtual Reality Simulation in Preclinical Dentistry: Can a Computerized Simulator Replace the Conventional Phantom Heads and Human Instruction? Simul. Healthc. 2017, 12, 332–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Gottlieb, R.; Vervoorn, J.M.; Buchanan, J. Simulation in Dentistry and Oral Health. In The Comprehensive Textbook of Healthcare Simulation; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 329–340. [Google Scholar]
  6. Perry, S.; Burrow, M.F.; Leung, W.K.; Bridges, S.M. Simulation and curriculum design: A global survey in dental education. Aust. Dent. J. 2017, 62, 453–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Higgins, D.; Hayes, M.; Taylor, J.; Wallace, J. A scoping review of simulation-based dental education. MedEdPublish 2020, 9, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gali, S.; Patil, A. The Technology of Haptics in Dental Education. J. Dent. Orofac. Res. 2018, 14, 70–75. [Google Scholar]
  9. Dutã, M.; Amariei, C.I.; Bogdan, C.M.; Popovici, D.M.; Ionescu, N.; Nuca, C.I. An overview of virtual and augmented reality in dental education. Oral. Health Dent. Manag. 2011, 10, 42–49. [Google Scholar]
  10. Roy, E.; Bakr, M.M.; George, R. The need for virtual reality simulators in dental education: A review. Saudi Dent. J. 2017, 29, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Luciano, C.; Banerjee, P.; DeFenti, T. Haptics-based virtual reality periodontal training simulator. Virtual Real. 2009, 13, 69–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kim, B.; Yang, E.; Choi, N.; Kim, S.; Ryu, J. Effects of auditory feedback and task difficulty on the cognitive load and virtual presence in a virtual reality dental simulation. J. Korean Dental Assoc. 2020, 58, 670–682. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ben-Gal, G.; Weiss, E.I.; Gafni, N.; Ziv, A. Testing manual dexterity using a virtual reality simulator: Reliability and validity. Eur. J. Dent. Educ. 2013, 17, 138–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hattori, A.; Tonami, K.; Tsuruta, J.; Hideshima, M.; Kimura, Y.; Nitta, H.; Araki, K. Effect of the haptic 3D virtual reality dental training simulator on assessment of tooth preparation. J. Dent. Sci. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dixon, J.; Towers, A.; Martin, N.; Field, J. Re-defining the virtual reality dental simulator: Demonstrating concurrent validity of clinically relevant assessment and feedback. Eur. J. Dent. Educ. 2021, 25, 108–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Buchanan, J.A. Use of simulation technology in dental education. J. Dent. Educ. 2001, 65, 1225–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Urbankova, A.; Engebretson, S.P. The use of haptics to predict preclinic operative dentistry performance and perceptual ability. J. Dent. Educ. 2011, 75, 1548–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. 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, 1151–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Evans, A.W. Assessing competence in surgical dentistry. Br. Dent. J. 2001, 190, 343–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Massie, T.H.; Salisbury, J.K. The phantom haptic interface: A device for probing virtual objects. In Proceedings of the ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, Chicago, IL, USA, 20 November 1994; Volume 55, pp. 295–300. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kikuchi, M. The Japanese system of dental clinical training. Prosthodont. Res. Pract. 2007, 6, 78–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  22. Papapanou, P.N.; Sanz, M.; Buduneli, N.; Dietrich, T.; Feres, M.; Fine, D.H.; Flemmig, T.F.; Garcia, R.; Giannobile, W.V.; Graziani, F. Periodontitis: Consensus report of workgroup 2 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. J. Periodontol. 2018, 89, S173–S182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Hefti, A.F. Periodontal probing. Crit. Rev. Oral Biol. Med. 1997, 8, 336–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Gerber, J.A.; Tan, W.C.; Balmer, T.E.; Salvi, G.E.; Lang, N.P. Bleeding on probing and pocket probing depth in relation to probing pressure and mucosal health around oral implants. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2009, 20, 75–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Steinberg, A.D.; Bashook, P.G.; Drummond, J.; Ashrafi, S.; Zefran, M. Assessment of faculty perception of content validity of Periosim©, a haptic-3D virtual reality dental training simulator. J. Dent. Educ. 2007, 71, 1574–1582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Kolesnikov, M.; Žefran, M.; Steinberg, A.D.; Bashook, P.G. PerioSim: Haptic virtual reality simulator for sensorimotor skill acquisition in dentistry. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Kobe, Japan, 12–17 May 2009; pp. 689–694. [Google Scholar]
  27. Yamaguchi, S.; Yoshida, Y.; Noborio, H.; Murakami, S.; Imazato, S. The usefulness of a haptic virtual reality simulator with repetitive training to teach caries removal and periodontal pocket probing skills. Dent. Mater. J. 2013, 32, 847–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Wang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Hou, J.; Wang, Y.; Lv, P.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, H. iDental: A haptic-based dental simulator and its preliminary user evaluation. IEEE Trans. Haptics 2011, 5, 332–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Rees, J.S.; Jenkins, S.M.; James, T.; Dummer, P.M.; Bryant, S.; Hayes, S.J.; Oliver, S.; Stone, D.; Fenton, C. An initial evaluation of virtual reality simulation in teaching pre-clinical operative dentistry in a UK setting. Eur. J. Prosthodont. Restor. Dent. 2007, 15, 89–92. [Google Scholar]
  30. Welka, A.; Splietha, C.; Wierinckc, E.; Gilpatrickd, R.O.; Meyera, G. Computer-assisted Learning and Simulation Systems in Dentistry–A Challenge to Society. Int. J. Comput. Dent. 2006, 9, 253–265. [Google Scholar]
  31. Robinson, P.B.; Lee, J.W. The use of real time video magnification for the pre-clinical teaching of crown preparations. Br. Dent. J. 2001, 190, 506–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  32. Norman, G.T.; Schmidt, H.G. The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Acad. Med. 1992, 67, 557–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. 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, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Germans, D.M.; Spoelder, H.J.W.; Renambot, L.; Bal, H.E.; van Daatselaar, S.; van der Stelt, P. Measuring in virtual reality: A case study in dentistry. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2008, 57, 1177–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Suebnukarn, S.; Hataidechadusadee, R.; Suwannasri, N.; Suprasert, N.; Rhienmora, P.; Haddawy, P. Access cavity preparation training using haptic virtual reality and microcomputed tomography tooth models. Int. Endod. J. 2011, 44, 983–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Toosi, A.; Arbabtafti, M.; Richardson, B. Virtual reality haptic simulation of root canal therapy. In Applied Mechanics and Materials; Trans Tech Publications, Ltd.: Freynbach, Switzerland, 2014; Volume 666, pp. 388–392. [Google Scholar]
  37. Suebnukarn, S.; Chaisombat, M.; Kongpunwijit, T.; Rhienmora, P. Construct validity and expert benchmarking of the haptic virtual reality dental simulator. J. Dent. Educ. 2014, 78, 1442–1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Suebnukarn, S.; Haddawy, P.; Rhienmora, P.; Gajananan, K. Haptic Virtual Reality for Skill Acquisition in Endodontics. J. Endod. 2010, 36, 53–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Reymus, M.; Liebermann, A.; Diegritz, C. Virtual reality: An effective tool for teaching root canal anatomy to undergraduate dental students—A preliminary study. Int. Endod. J. 2020, 53, 1581–1587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, D.; Zhao, X.; Shi, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Hou, J.; Xiao, J. Six degree-of-freedom haptic simulation of probing dental caries within a narrow oral cavity. IEEE Trans. Haptics 2016, 9, 279–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Osnes, C.; Keeling, A.J. Developing haptic caries simulation for dental education. J. Surg. Simul. 2017, 4, 29–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Holzinger, D.; Juergens, P.; Shahim, K.; Reyes, M.; Schicho, K.; Millesi, G.; Perisanidis, C.; Zeilhofer, H.F.; Seemann, R. Accuracy of soft tissue prediction in surgery-first treatment concept in orthognathic surgery: A prospective study. J. Cranio-Maxillofac. Surg. 2018, 46, 1455–1460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Metzler, P.; Geiger, E.J.; Alcon, A.; Ma, X.; Steinbacher, D.M. Three-dimensional virtual surgery accuracy for free fibula mandibular reconstruction: Planned versus actual results. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2014, 72, 2601–2612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. D’Souza, K.M.; Aras, M.A. Types of implant surgical guides in dentistry: A review. J. Oral Implantol. 2012, 38, 643–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gulati, M.; Anand, V.; Salaria, S.K.; Jain, N.; Gupta, S. Computerized implant-dentistry: Advances toward automation. J. Indian Soc. Periodontol. 2015, 19, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Holst, S.; Blatz, M.B.; Eitner, S. Precision for computer-guided implant placement: Using 3D planning software and fixed intraoral reference points. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2007, 65, 393–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Verstreken, K.; Van Cleynenbreugel, J.; Martens, K.; Marchal, G.; van Steenberghe, D.; Suetens, P. An image-guided planning system for endosseous oral implants. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 1998, 17, 842–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tardieu, P.B.; Vrielinck, L.; Escolano, E. Computer-assisted implant placement. A case report: Treatment of the mandible. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 2003, 18, 599–604. [Google Scholar]
  49. Sarment, D.P.; Sukovic, P.; Clinthorne, N. Accuracy of implant placement with a stereolithographic surgical guide. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 2003, 18, 571–577. [Google Scholar]
  50. Pflesser, B.; Petersik, A.; Tiede, U.; Höhne, K.H.; Leuwer, R. Volume cutting for virtual petrous bone surgery. Comput. Aided Surg. 2002, 7, 74–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Rhienmora, P.; Haddawy, P.; Suebnukarn, S.; Dailey, M.N. A VR environment for assessing dental surgical expertise. In Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications; IOS Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2009; Volume 200, pp. 746–748. [Google Scholar]
  52. Kusumoto, N.; Sohmura, T.; Yamada, S.; Wakabayashi, K.; Nakamura, T.; Yatani, H. Application of virtual reality force feedback haptic device for oral implant surgery. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2006, 17, 708–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Schendel, S.; Montgomery, K.; Sorokin, A.; Lionetti, G. A surgical simulator for planning and performing repair of cleft lips. J. Cranio-Maxillofac. Surg. 2005, 33, 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Chang, H.-W.; Lin, H.-H.; Chortrakarnkij, P.; Kim, S.G.; Lo, L.-J. Intraoperative navigation for single-splint two-jaw orthognathic surgery: From model to actual surgery. J. Cranio-Maxillofac. Surg. 2015, 43, 1119–1126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Yu, H.; Shen, S.G.; Wang, X.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, S. The indication and application of computer-assisted navigation in oral and maxillofacial surgery—Shanghai’s experience based on 104 cases. J. Cranio-Maxillofac. Surg. 2013, 41, 770–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Heiland, M.; Petersik, A.; Pflesser, B.; Tiede, U.; Schmelzle, R.; Höhne, K.-H.; Handels, H. Realistic haptic interaction for computer simulation of dental surgery. Int. Congr. Ser. 2004, 1268, 1226–1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ioannou, I.; Kazmierczak, E.; Stern, L. Comparison of oral surgery task performance in a virtual reality surgical simulator and an animal model using objective measures. In Proceedings of the 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Milan, Italy, 25–29 August 2015; pp. 5114–5117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Wang, D.; Tong, H.; Shi, Y.; Zhang, Y. Interactive haptic simulation of tooth extraction by a constraint-based haptic rendering approach. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Seattle, WA, USA, 26–30 May 2015; pp. 278–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Joseph, D.; Jehl, J.-P.; Maureira, P.; Perrenot, C.; Miller, N.; Bravetti, P.; Ambrosini, P.; Tran, N. Relative contribution of haptic technology to assessment and training in implantology. Biomed Res. Int. 2014, 2014, 413951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ogawa, T.; Ikawa, T.; Shigeta, Y.; Kasama, S.; Ando, E.; Fukushima, S.; Hattori, A.; Suzuki, N. Virtual reality image applications for treatment planning in prosthodontic dentistry. In Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 18: NextMed; IOS Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2011; Volume 163, pp. 422–424. [Google Scholar]
  61. Suebnukarn, S.; Phatthanasathiankul, N.; Sombatweroje, S.; Rhienmora, P.; Haddawy, P. Process and outcome measures of expert/novice performance on a haptic virtual reality system. J. Dent. 2009, 37, 658–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. 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, 782–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Feeney, L.; Reynolds, P.A.; Eaton, K.A.; Harper, J. A description of the new technologies used in transforming dental education. Br. Dent. J. 2008, 204, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Esser, C.; Kerschbaum, T.; Winkelmann, V.; Krage, T.; Faber, F. A comparison of the visual and technical assessment of preparations made by dental students. Eur. J. Dent. Educ. 2006, 10, 157–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Rhienmora, P.; Haddawy, P.; Khanal, P.; Suebnukarn, S.; Dailey, M.N. A virtual reality simulator for teaching and evaluating dental procedures. Methods Inf. Med. 2010, 49, 396–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. de Boer, I.R.; Wesselink, P.R.; Vervoorn, J.M. Student performance and appreciation using 3D vs. 2D vision in a virtual learning environment. Eur. J. Dent. Educ. 2016, 20, 142–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Monitoring of Recovery Process at Yeongildae Beach, South Korea, Using a Video System
Previous
A Novel Bi-Tuning SSO Algorithm for Optimizing the Budget-Limited Sensing Coverage Problem in Wireless Sensor Networks
Next