目的 比较“九宫格”开髓方法与常规开髓方法对口腔医学专业本科生磨牙开髓术技能培训的效果。方法 选取首次参加开髓术培训的天津医科大学2016级“5+3一体化”口腔医学专业22名学生为研究对象,先后采用常规开髓方法和“九宫格”开髓方法进行第一磨牙模型牙和离体牙的开髓术操作,记录操作时长,按照磨牙开髓术细化评分标准对学生的开髓术操作进行评分并比较。结果 在模型牙上,学生采用常规开髓方法和“九宫格”开髓方法的操作时间分别为[33.0(26.3,48.8)]分钟和[20.0(12.3,24.0)]分钟,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);采用常规开髓方法和“九宫格”开髓方法的单位时间内的评分(以下简称为评分/时间)分别为[0.3(0.2,0.5)]分和[0.7(0.5,1.0)]分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在离体牙上,学生采用常规开髓方法和“九宫格”开髓方法的操作时间分别为[40.0(30.0,60.0)]分钟和[24.0(18.0,35.0)]分钟,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);采用常规开髓方法和“九宫格”开髓方法的评分/时间分别为[0.2(0.1,0.3)]分和[0.4(0.3,0.6)]分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 在口腔医学专业学生开髓术培训的初始阶段,“九宫格”开髓方法有助于迅速提升学生的开髓术水平,具有较好的教学效果。

Objective To compare the learning outcomes of Sudoku grid endodontic access opening (SEO) and that of traditional endodontic access opening (TEO) on the training of endodontic access opening skills for undergraduates.Methods Twenty-two undergraduates receiving endodontic access opening training for the first time were selected. The self control experiment was conducted on the students performing SEO and TEO on the artificial teeth and extracted teeth of the first molar, respectively. The time needed for completion of access opening was recorded respectively. The results were then scored according to the standard of endodontic access opening. The statistical analysis was carried out finally.Results On the artificial teeth, the operating time of TEO than SEO was [33.0(26.3, 48.8)] vs [20.0 (12.3, 24.0)]; the score/ time of them was [0.3 (0.2, 0.5)] vs [0.7(0.5, 1.0)]. On the extracted teeth, the operating time of TEO than SEO was [40.0(30.0, 60.0)] vs [24.0 (18.0, 35.0)]; the score/ time of TEO than SEO was [0.2 (0.1, 0.3)] vs [0.4(0.3,0.6)]. All the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05).Conclusions At the initial stage of endodontic access opening skills training,SEO method significantly improves trainees' operant level faster than TEO method