Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Oral Diagnostic sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, SEGi University, Kota Damansara, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia
  • 2 Department of Periodontology & Oral Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, SEGi University, Kota Damansara, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia
  • 3 Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Dentistry, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham Malaysia, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
  • 4 Department of Oral Cancer Research & Coordinating Centre (OCRCC), Faculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 5 Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Taylor's University, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
  • 6 Department of Community Oral Health, Faculty of Dentistry, SEGi University, Kota Damansara, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia
J Dent Educ, 2025 Jan 06.
PMID: 39762459 DOI: 10.1002/jdd.13817

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Intraoral periapical radiographic techniques are mandatory exercises taught to undergraduate students during their training. The key challenges encountered while teaching the bisecting angle technique (BAT) include correctly positioning the X-ray cone and adjusting the central X-ray beam to the tooth of interest. To address this, a custom-designed pointed laser light (CDPLL) was fabricated and attached to the X-ray cone. This study evaluated the effectiveness of CDPLL compared to conventional BAT in acquiring quality radiographs, reducing errors, and evaluating students' perceptions through a questionnaire.

METHODS: Third-year Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) students were divided into two groups of 26 each. Group 1 used Conventional BAT, while Group 2 employed Laser-Assisted BAT on a mannequin. Both techniques were taught through theory and clinical demonstrations. Students took radiographs of incisors, canines, premolars, and molars of both jaws. Group 1 students then transitioned to Laser-Assisted BAT and repeated the radiographs. Inter-group and intra-group comparisons of radiographic quality and errors were analyzed using Chi-Square tests.

RESULTS: Group 2 produced more excellent (41.8%) and acceptable (47.6%) radiographs, with fewer unacceptable ones (10.6%) than Group 1 (p 

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.