G Van Gorp1, M Lambrechts2, R Jacobs3,4, D Declerck2. 1. Department of Oral Health Sciences and Department of Dentistry, Unit of Paediatric Dentistry and Special Dental Care, KU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7, PO box 7001, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium. gertrude.vangorp@uzleuven.be. 2. Department of Oral Health Sciences and Department of Dentistry, Unit of Paediatric Dentistry and Special Dental Care, KU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7, PO box 7001, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium. 3. OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Department Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visualisation of the third dimension has been reported to increase effectiveness of correctly diagnosing traumatic dental injuries. AIM: To assess the ability of paediatric dentists to detect and diagnose Traumatic Dental Injuries (TDI) using two different imaging modalities, intraoral radiographs (2D) and CBCT scans (3D). In addition, observer's confidence regarding the obtained diagnosis, using either technique, was assessed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Both 2D and 3D images of 20 dental trauma cases in children were presented in random order to a panel of thirteen paediatric dentists. Observers received instructions for the screening of the images for radiographic findings related to dental trauma, using structured scoring sheets for 2D and 3D images. Observed data were compared to those recorded by two experienced benchmark observers. A ten-point scale was used for assessing observer's confidence regarding their final diagnosis using 2D versus 3D images. RESULTS: Performance of individual observers showed wide variation. Statistical significance was reached for correctly detected and correctly diagnosed findings (p = 0.02), in favor of 3D. Most of the observers reported comparable confidence using 2D and 3D, two observers were more confident using 3D and one observer was more confident using 2D. CONCLUSIONS: Paediatric dentist's ability to detect and diagnose findings in patients with TDI was higher on 3D images. Most observers showed a similar confidence score of their diagnostic performance both on 2D and on 3D.
BACKGROUND: Visualisation of the third dimension has been reported to increase effectiveness of correctly diagnosing traumatic dental injuries. AIM: To assess the ability of paediatric dentists to detect and diagnose Traumatic Dental Injuries (TDI) using two different imaging modalities, intraoral radiographs (2D) and CBCT scans (3D). In addition, observer's confidence regarding the obtained diagnosis, using either technique, was assessed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Both 2D and 3D images of 20 dental trauma cases in children were presented in random order to a panel of thirteen paediatric dentists. Observers received instructions for the screening of the images for radiographic findings related to dental trauma, using structured scoring sheets for 2D and 3D images. Observed data were compared to those recorded by two experienced benchmark observers. A ten-point scale was used for assessing observer's confidence regarding their final diagnosis using 2D versus 3D images. RESULTS: Performance of individual observers showed wide variation. Statistical significance was reached for correctly detected and correctly diagnosed findings (p = 0.02), in favor of 3D. Most of the observers reported comparable confidence using 2D and 3D, two observers were more confident using 3D and one observer was more confident using 2D. CONCLUSIONS: Paediatric dentist's ability to detect and diagnose findings in patients with TDI was higher on 3D images. Most observers showed a similar confidence score of their diagnostic performance both on 2D and on 3D.