Expectancy from, and acceptance of augmented reality in dental education programs: A structural equation model.

OBJECTIVE: Dental schools need hands-on training and feedback. Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies enable remote work and training. Education programs only partially integrated these technologies. For better technology integration, infrastructure readiness, prior-knowledge readiness, expectations, and learner attitudes toward AR and VR technologies must be understood together. Thus, this study creates a structural equation model to understand how these factors affect dental students' technology use. METHODS: A correlational survey was done. Four questionnaires were sent to 755 dental students from three schools. These participants were convenience-sampled. Surveys were developed using validity tests like explanatory and confirmatory factor analyses, Cronbach's ɑ, and composite reliability. Ten primary research hypotheses are tested with path analysis. RESULTS: A total of 81.22% responded to the survey (755 out of 930). Positive AR attitude, expectancy, and acceptance were endogenous variables. Positive attitudes toward AR were significantly influenced by two exogenous variables: infrastructure readiness (B = 0.359, ß = 0.386, L = 0.305, U = 0.457, p = 0.002) and prior-knowledge readiness (B = -0.056, ß = 0.306, L = 0.305, U = 0.457, p = 0.002). Expectancy from AR was affected by infrastructure, prior knowledge, and positive and negative AR attitudes. Infrastructure, prior-knowledge readiness, and positive attitude toward AR had positive effects on expectancy from AR (B = 0.201, ß = 0.204, L = 0.140, U = 0.267, p = 0.002). Negative attitude had a negative impact (B = -0.056, ß = -0.054, L = 0.091, U = 0.182, p = 0.002). Another exogenous variable was AR acceptance, which was affected by infrastructure, prior-knowledge preparation, positive attitudes, and expectancy. Significant differences were found in infrastructure, prior-knowledge readiness, positive attitude toward AR, and expectancy from AR (B = 0.041, ß = 0.046, L = 0.026, U = 0.086, p = 0.054). CONCLUSION: Infrastructure and prior-knowledge readiness for AR significantly affect positive AR attitudes. Together, these three criteria boost AR's potential. Infrastructure readiness, prior-knowledge readiness, positive attitudes toward AR, and AR expectations all increase AR adoption. The study provides insights that can help instructional system designers, developers, dental education institutions, and program developers better integrate these technologies into dental education programs. Integration can improve dental students' hands-on experience and program performance by providing training options anywhere and anytime.

Perception of color mismatch or conspicuous marginal adaptation in extraoral prostheses with eye-tracking.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Color matching and marginal integrity are major challenges when providing extraoral maxillofacial prostheses. Which of the color and marginal harmony features are more important for the extraoral prostheses to be inconspicuous is unclear. Studies on the perception of these prostheses with objective evaluation criteria are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this observational study was to investigate the significance of color mismatch and conspicuous marginal adaptation in the perception of extraoral maxillofacial prostheses using eye-tracking technology. The secondary aim was to evaluate the perception of extraoral maxillofacial prostheses with regard to the observers' sex. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-seven face images, in 3 groups, representing well-fitting orbital prostheses with a color mismatch (IC), prostheses with a good color match but distinct marginal adaptation (IM), and symmetrical face images, were viewed for 5 seconds by 52 laypeople. Time to first fixation (TFF), fixation duration (FD), and fixation count (FC) at defined areas of interest were recorded and analyzed by an eye-tracking device. Because of the nested structure of data, a sex- and age-adjusted random intercept linear mixed effects model was used to assess the difference between IC, IM, and SI. Bonferroni corrected P values were used for pairwise comparisons. The difference between observers' sex was evaluated with random intercept mixed model by adjusting for age for each image. For repeated measurement analysis, the lm4, lmerTest, and emmeans libraries in R version 4.3.1 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing) were used (α=.05 for all tests). RESULTS: Significant differences were found between the symmetrical image group and other study groups at the facial prosthesis region in all parameters (each P<.001). Observers first focused on the facial prostheses in IC (0.72 seconds) and in IM (0.789 seconds). Longer fixation durations, 1.909, 1.989 seconds for IC and IM (PIC<.001, PIM<.001), respectively, and a higher fixation count for IC (5.28) (P<.001) and for IM (5.45) (P<.001) were recorded on facial prostheses compared with other areas of interest. Women were more focused on the prosthesis than men in the IC and IM groups considering FD (PIC=.003, PIM<.001) and FC values (PIC=.016, PIM<.001, PSI<.001). Fixation duration for women and men was 2.097 seconds and 1.739 seconds in the IC group, 2.219 seconds and 1.78 seconds in the IM group, and 1.364 seconds and 1.222 seconds in the SI group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Since the color mismatch and distinct marginal adaptation of maxillofacial prostheses were recognized using eye-tracking technology, both features appeared to be equally significant to be considered in fabrication procedures.

Perception of orbital epitheses evaluated with eye tracker.

PURPOSE: Orbital epitheses replace a missing eyeball and surrounding soft tissue. Perception of epithesis in public gaze and the attention areas on the face are of interest. This study aimed to examine the differences in perception of orbital epitheses by prosthodontists, dentistry students, and laypeople with an objective evaluation tool that utilized eye-tracking technology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four frontal facial images of 12 patients who had orbital epitheses were viewed by 81 observers (prosthodontists, dentistry students, laypeople) in random order for 5 seconds each. Gaze data were analyzed. Kruskal-Wallis H test with Bonferroni correction was used to compare parameters in groups and areas of interest. RESULTS: First fixation duration at the mouth for symmetrical images were 0.30, 0.28, and 0.25 seconds for prosthodontists, students, and laypeople, respectively. Fixation duration at the mouth for the laypeople (0.27 second) was shorter than students (0.29 second) and prosthodontists (0.31 second) at symmetrical images. Time to the first fixation to epithesis, nose, and eye was significantly lower than the forehead and mouth for all groups. Fixation count at epithesis was 6.36 for prosthodontists, 5.64 for students, and 5.34 for laypeople. CONCLUSION: Eyes were of most significant interest for all observer groups in symmetrical images. Individuals dealing with dentistry, especially prosthodontists, paid more attention to the mouth region along with the eyes in symmetrical images, considering fixation duration and fixation count. Attention directed to epithesis by all groups was verified with objective and measurable criteria. Prosthodontists' attention to epithesis and mouth was evident considering the four parameters measured.