(PR041) Evaluation of Endodontic Diagnostic Accuracy and Case Difficulty to Dental Experience and Training

Objective: This study aimed to assess how diagnostic accuracy, case difficulty and endodontic treatment recommendations vary depending on experience. We hypothesized that diagnostic accuracy and difficulty ratings would correlate, with experienced practitioners demonstrating greater consistency in both correct diagnoses and difficulty assessments

Methods: Anonymous surveys were conducted REDCap for 5 cases with diagnosis and treatment questions, incorporating a modified version of the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) Difficulty Case Assessment Form. The group of dental students (n=31), dentists (n=11), and endodontists (n =7) participated. Participants assessed pulpal and periapical diagnosis for each case and rated difficulty on a scale of 1 (low), 2 (moderate), or 3 (high). We analyzed difficulty ratings using one-way ANOVA, with p-values calculated to assess statistical significance across groups. Diagnostic accuracy was determined by calculating the percentage of correct diagnoses in each group. Result: One hundred and one surveys were initiated. Forty-nine were completed and included for statistical analysis. Overall, the correct diagnosis rate of 74.8% for pulpal cases and 66.8 for periapical cases. Overall, the correct recommendation for endodontic treatment is 86.8%. Five separate one-way ANOVA analyses for each case were for case difficulty. All p-values were >0.05.

Conclusion: The result does not support the hypothesis that diagnostic proficiency and difficulty assessment would differ significantly across educational levels. The power of statistical analysis may be affected due to the limited data. Future studies could benefit from a larger and more representative sample to explore variations in diagnostic accuracy and treatment recommendations.