2520 Effectiveness of Using MARC-PS to Teach Light Curing to Dental Students

Friday, March 22, 2013: 3:30 p.m. - 4:45 p.m.
Location: Hall 4 (Washington State Convention Center)
Presentation Type: Poster Session
S. SETH1, C. LEE1, R.B. PRICE2, and M. ALSHAAFI3, 1Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada, 2PriceLab, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada, 3King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Objectives: This study evaluated the effectiveness of using the MARC training system as an educational tool to teach dental students proper light curing technique.

Methods: At the end of their First Year course, the dental class was split into two randomly assigned groups. Group 1 (n=18 students) was tested using the MARC-Patient Simulator (BlueLight, Halifax). MARC measures the irradiance and calculates the energy (J/cm2) received by a simulated Class I restoration in the maxillary second molar in a dental mannequin. The students in Group 1 were then given individualized training using MARC on how to optimize their light curing technique. They were then retested. They were retested again five months later together with the remaining 18 classmembers (Group 2) who had not yet received instruction using MARC. ANOVA and Fisher's PLSD tests were used to determine if training using MARC made a significant improvement in the energy delivered by the students (alpha=0.05).

Results: MARC provided immediate feedback on how much light energy was delivered. Initially, Group 1 students delivered 5.60±1.94 J/cm2 (mean±SD) of energy. After training using MARC, the same students delivered significantly more energy, 7.40±0.35 J/cm2.  Five months later, Group 1 students, delivered 7.56±0.34 J/cm2 to the same tooth using the same light.  This was not significantly more energy from 5 months previously.  Group 2 students (who had not received training using MARC in First Year) delivered significantly less energy than their classmates, 6.30±1.30 J/cm2. After receiving training using MARC, students in Group 2 also delivered significantly more energy, 7.20±0.56 J/cm2. There was no significant difference between the two groups of students after they had received training using MARC.

Conclusions: Students who received training using MARC delivered significantly more energy and had better light curing technique than their classmates. This improvement was still evident five months after instruction (p<0.05).

Keywords: Composites, Curing lights and Education research