Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Experimental study demonstrates improved efficiency and ergonomics with 3D dental microscopes over conventional devices in novice users, indicating practical benefits for dental training.
This study compared procedural performance and user experience under three visualization conditions: unaided vision, dental operating microscope (DOM), and three-dimensional dental operating microscope (3D-DOM). In this experimental repeated-measures study, thirty dental students performed a targeting task in randomized order using a DOM (Flexion Advanced, CJ-Optik, Germany) and a 3D-DOM (Promise Vision 3D™, Seiler, USA) at 8× magnification, with a two-week washout period. Accuracy (0–4 scale), task time, and participant-reported outcomes (CVI-S = 0.90) were assessed. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA, Friedman test, Bonferroni-adjusted post hoc comparisons, and Spearman correlation ( p < 0.05). Magnification significantly improved procedural accuracy compared to unaided vision ( p < 0.001). The DOM achieved the highest accuracy (3.40 ± 0.30), required the longest task time (5.14 ± 1.70 min) and provided the greatest visual clarity, although 13.3% of participants reported image splitting with greater difficulty in spatial orientation. In contrast, the 3D-DOM demonstrated a more balanced performance between accuracy and efficiency (3.36 ± 0.20; 3.20 ± 0.81 min), with improved spatial orientation, reduced visual discomfort, and the most favorable ergonomic outcomes ( p < 0.05). These findings indicate that while DOM optimizes visual precision, 3D-DOM achieves a more favorable balance between efficiency, usability, and operator ergonomics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tran et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: