Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 15, 2026
Evaluating Flight Performance and Eye Movement Patterns Using Virtual Reality Flight Simulator
Published on: May 19, 2023
A comparison of traditional and virtual reality haptic simulator approaches in preclinical endodontic training:
Sıla Nur Usta1, Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal Silva2, Cangül Keskin3
1Department of Endodontics, Gulhane Faculty of Dentistry, University of Health Sciences, Ankara, Turkey.
Aim:
This study aimed to evaluate the influence of virtual reality (VR) haptic simulators on manual dexterity, self-confidence and stress levels of 3rd-semester dental students during preclinical endodontic training, as well as to determine the optimal timing for their introduction into the curriculum-before or after training with artificial teeth.
Methodology:
Forty volunteered dental students enrolled in preclinical endodontic training were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 (VR Haptic Simulator group, n = 20) completed four sessions with VR haptic simulators, including three training sessions followed by an evaluation session, before practicing on artificial teeth, whilst Group 2 (Control group, n = 20) performed a single attempt on artificial teeth first followed by the identical VR haptic simulator training period as Group 1. Prior to the training sessions, both groups received standardized lectures and demonstrations on access cavity preparation. Pre- and post-training evaluations included stress levels measured via a visual analog scale (VAS) at different phases, assessment of manual dexterity through preclinical training with artificial teeth performance scores, and self-confidence surveys. Statistical analyses were conducted with significance set at p < .05.
Results:
Group 1 demonstrated significantly higher manual dexterity scores and self-assessed proficiency compared to Group 2 (p < .05). Stress levels, measured via VAS, were notably reduced following simulator practice in both groups, with Group 1 reporting lower anxiety levels during preclinical training with artificial teeth sessions (p < .05). Simulator-based performance metrics were comparable between the groups (p > .05). Self-confidence surveys indicated that Group 1 felt better prepared and more confident in performing access cavity preparations and managing procedural challenges.
Conclusion:
The integration of VR haptic simulators before preclinical training with artificial teeth has a positive effect on students' manual dexterity along with reduced stress and increased self-confidence in clinical skills. Further research is needed to explore long-term effects and optimal integration strategies for VR simulators in dental curricula.
