IADR Abstract Archives
Rubric for Evaluation of Endodontic Treatments Performed by Dental Students
Objectives: To evaluate the use of an analytic rubric for the evaluation of root canal treatments performed in extracted molars by undergraduate students.
Methods: Fourth-year dental students of Rey Juan Carlos University (Spain) built 372 portfolios of root canal treatments performed in extracted molars during their preclinical practices. The systems used were manual preparation with K-files (Dentsply Maillefer) or rotary preparation with RECIPROC® blue (VDW) or PROTAPER NEXT® (Dentsply Maillefer) files. A random sample of 42 portfolios were blindly evaluated by four evaluators using an analytic rubric according to the following parameters: 1. Radiographic assessment (0-1); 2. Access preparation (0-2.5); 3. Instrumentation (0-2.5); 4. Obturation (0-2.5); 5. Content of the portfolio (0-1), and 6. Presentation of the portfolio (0-0.5). The maximum global score was 10 points for each portfolio. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to test the reliability amongst the four evaluators in each parameter of the rubric as well as in the global scores of the portfolios (p<0.05).
Results: The ICC for presentation and content of the portfolio was poor (<0.40). Contrarily, the reliability amongst the evaluators was good for radiographic assessment, access preparation, instrumentation and obturation (ICC between 0.60 and 0.74). The overall portfolio scores for each evaluator were: A: 5.5±2, B: 5.2±1.8, C:5.3±1.6, D:4.8±1.6, with an ICC of 0.69.
Conclusions: The use of an analytic rubric allows different evaluators to reach consistent global scores when grading endodontic treatments performed by dental students. However, parameters such as presentation and content of the portfolio elude a consistent evaluation, even with the adoption of a rubric. Furthermore, according to the low scores obtained, the use of an analytic rubric negatively affects students` global score.
Methods: Fourth-year dental students of Rey Juan Carlos University (Spain) built 372 portfolios of root canal treatments performed in extracted molars during their preclinical practices. The systems used were manual preparation with K-files (Dentsply Maillefer) or rotary preparation with RECIPROC® blue (VDW) or PROTAPER NEXT® (Dentsply Maillefer) files. A random sample of 42 portfolios were blindly evaluated by four evaluators using an analytic rubric according to the following parameters: 1. Radiographic assessment (0-1); 2. Access preparation (0-2.5); 3. Instrumentation (0-2.5); 4. Obturation (0-2.5); 5. Content of the portfolio (0-1), and 6. Presentation of the portfolio (0-0.5). The maximum global score was 10 points for each portfolio. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to test the reliability amongst the four evaluators in each parameter of the rubric as well as in the global scores of the portfolios (p<0.05).
Results: The ICC for presentation and content of the portfolio was poor (<0.40). Contrarily, the reliability amongst the evaluators was good for radiographic assessment, access preparation, instrumentation and obturation (ICC between 0.60 and 0.74). The overall portfolio scores for each evaluator were: A: 5.5±2, B: 5.2±1.8, C:5.3±1.6, D:4.8±1.6, with an ICC of 0.69.
Conclusions: The use of an analytic rubric allows different evaluators to reach consistent global scores when grading endodontic treatments performed by dental students. However, parameters such as presentation and content of the portfolio elude a consistent evaluation, even with the adoption of a rubric. Furthermore, according to the low scores obtained, the use of an analytic rubric negatively affects students` global score.