目的 探讨数字化口腔教学评估系统在口腔修复牙体预备评价中的应用。方法 2022年12月,选取第四军医大学口腔医院修复科5名教师和2018级口腔医学专业30名学生为研究对象,使用数字化口腔教学评估系统(DHC220)对教师进行培训并开展牙体预备操作考核。以随机数字表法将学生平均分为A组和B组。教师先对A组学生牙体预备操作进行评分,在教师接受DHC220培训后再对B组学生进行评分。同时,DHC220对两组学生进行系统自动评分。应用Friedman检验对教师评分和DHC220评分进行统计学分析,并计算教师评分的组内相关系数以评价其一致性。结果 DHC220对A组学生的评分为65(25)分;教师1~教师5的评分分别为82(12)分、80(10)分、82(10)分、75(10)分、83(8)分。DHC220评分与教师评分的总体差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001),仅教师4的评分与DHC220评分差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。教师评分的组内相关系数为 0.79,具有较好的一致性。DHC220对B组学生的评分为68(15)分;教师1~教师5的评分分别为74(19)分、75(20)分、72(11)分、73(17)分、74(13)分。DHC220评分与教师评分的总体差异仍具有统计学意义(P<0.001),但仅教师1的评分与DHC220评分的差异具有统计学意义(P <0.001),其余教师与DHC220的评分比较、教师评分之间的比较差异均无统计学意义(均P >0.05)。教师评分的组内相关系数为 0.95,具有极好的一致性。结论 应用DHC220对教师进行培训,有助于提升教师对牙体预备评价的一致性、准确性与客观性,在一定程度上有利于教学评价更好地发挥评估与反馈作用。

Objective To explore the application of a digital oral teaching evaluation system in the preparation evaluation of dental restoration teeth. Methods In December 2022, 5 teachers from the Department of Prosthetics at the Fourth Military Medical University Stomatological Hospital and 30 students majoring in Stomatology in 2018 were selected as the research subjects. The digital dental teaching evaluation system (DHC220) was used to train teachers and conduct dental preparation operation assessments. Divide students evenly into Group A and Group B using a random number table method. The teacher first rates the dental preparation operations of Group A students, and then rates Group B students after receiving DHC220 training. Meanwhile, DHC220 automatically rates two groups of students through the system. Apply Friedman test for statistical analysis of teacher ratings and DHC220 ratings, and calculate the intra group correlation coefficient of teacher ratings to evaluate their consistency. Results DHC220 rated Group A students at 65 (25); The scores for Teacher 1 to Teacher 5 were 82 (12), 80 (10), 82 (10), 75 (10), and 83 (8), respectively. The overall difference between the DHC220 score and the teacher score was statistically significant (P<0.001), and only the score of Teacher 4 had no statistically significant difference with the DHC220 score (all P>0.05). The intra group correlation coefficient of teacher ratings was 0.79, indicating good consistency. DHC220's rating for Group B students was 68 (15) points; The scores for Teacher 1 to Teacher 5 were 74 (19), 75 (20), 72 (11), 73 (17), and 74 (13), respectively. The difference between DHC220 scores and teacher scores was still statistically significant (P<0.001), but only the difference between Teacher 1's score and DHC220 scores was statistically significant (P<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the comparison of scores between other teachers and DHC220, as well as between teacher scores (all P>0.05). The intra group correlation coefficient of teacher ratings was 0.95, indicating excellent consistency. Conclusions Utilizing a digital teaching assessment system for teacher training can enhance the consistency, accuracy, and objectivity of teachers in evaluating tooth preparations. To a certain extent, it facilitates more effective assessment and feedback in the teaching process.