4.5 Article

Breaking the error chain with SEE: cascade analysis of endodontic errors in clinical training

期刊

MEDICAL EDUCATION ONLINE
卷 28, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10872981.2023.2268348

关键词

Cascade analysis; dentistry; endodontics; error; outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aims to explore the causes and effects of clinical endodontic training errors and reveals the insufficient sensitivity of students to the treatment outcomes. Misunderstandings about working length and width play a significant role in propagating errors.
The ongoing endeavors to uncover the link between the prevalent errors in clinical endodontic training and undergraduate education are founded on tentative assumptions. This investigation was aimed at determining if cascade analysis can provide an understanding of the origins and causes of errors and if the sensitivity of student reports to the impact of errors on treatment outcomes can be established.In 2021, a group of investigators from the endodontics department concerned with clinical dental education launched the Study of Endodontic Errors (SEE). Sixty-six undergraduate dental students at one dental teaching hospital submitted anonymous narratives of problems they witnessed in their root canal treatment practices. The reports were examined to determine the sequence of events and the major errors. We kept track of the consequences of treatment outcomes, both as reported by students and as deduced by investigators.In 77% of the narratives, a chain of errors was recorded. The majority of the errors that took place were related to the working length or width of root canals. A substantial portion, 86%, of these errors could have been prevented through a deeper comprehension of the concepts that underlie working length and width. 75% of the errors that initiated cascades involved losing the correct working length. When asked whether the treatment outcome was compromised, students answered affirmatively in 16% of cases in which their narratives described compromised outcomes. Unacceptable outcomes necessitating re-treatment accounted for only 3% of student-reported consequences, but when investigator-inferred consequences were considered, the percentage more than doubled (7%).Cascade analysis of student error narratives is useful in understanding the triggering chain of events, but students provide insufficient information about how treatment outcomes are affected. Misconceptions about working length and width appear to play a significant role in the propagation of procedural errors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据