Exploring training dental implant placement using static or dynamic devices among dental students.

Background: Static computer‐assisted surgery (s‐CAIS) and dynamic computer‐assisted implant surgery (d‐CAIS) are the main digital approaches in guiding dental implant placement. Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore and compare the learning curves for s‐CAIS and d‐CAIS by beginners. Materials and Methods: Three dental students used each dental model for drilling five positions with missing teeth. Operators performed the drilling test for five sets of dental models with an interval of 7 ± 1 days assisted by the d‐CAIS system. After a six‐month break, the same students performed the drilling test again in the same way but with the s‐CAIS system. A total of thirty models were used, and 150 implants were inserted. The operation time and relative deviations were recorded and calculated. Correlations between various deviation parameters and attempts were tested with independent‐samples Kruskal–Wallis tests. Results: A significant difference between the two groups was found in the operation time (p <.001). For accuracy, the difference was found in the first attempt of coronal and apical deviations but disappeared as the training went on. As the practice progressed, improvement was evident in the d‐CAIS group but not in the s‐CAIS group. When reaching the plateau stage of the learning curve of the d‐CAIS group (after five attempts), the influence of different methods of guidance was limited between the two groups. Conclusions: A learning curve effect was found in d‐CAIS but not in s‐CAIS in vitro tests by beginners. The operating procedure of dynamic navigated and static template‐guided implant placement was easy to master. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]