ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2024
Impact of using single-file reciprocating system on the quality of root canal treatment treated by undergraduate students.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality of Root Canal Fillings and Procedural Errors for In Vivo Studies Prepared in Different Clinical Settings and with Rotary Systems: A Systematic Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Pooled it
- Procedural Errors Associated With the Use of Rotary and Reciprocating Endodontic Instruments in Undergraduate Settings: A Scoping Review.International journal of dentistry · 2026Review
- Evaluating success rates of rotary NiTi versus reciprocating files in endodontic treatment.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Assessment of radiographic errors and repetition rates in undergraduate endodontic education: a retrospective clinical study.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Article
- Evaluation and comparison of mandibular molar root canal filling quality performed by undergraduate preclinical dental students.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Comparative Analysis of the Quality of Root Canal Fillings of In Vivo Studies Conducted in Saudi Arabia and Worldwide: A Systematic Review.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the use of a single-file reciprocating system on the technical quality of root canal filling and treatment by radiographic assessment of cases treated by undergraduate dental students. Materials and methods: This was a retrospective cross-sectional clinical study of endodontically treatments conducted by fourth-year undergraduate students during the academic year 2021-2022. Root canal preparation was performed using the WaveOne Gold system with matching single-cone gutta-percha. The collected data included sex, tooth position, number of canals, and treatment time (first or second semester). The quality of the root canal filling was assessed based on the root canal filling length, density, and taper. The presence of ledges, apical transportation, perforation, and instrument separation were recorded. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28. Chi-square tests were used, and the statistical significance level was set at P < 0.05. Results: A total of 601 teeth were included. The length of the root canal filling was adequate in 93.51 % of the teeth, underfilled in 2.82 %, and overfilled in 3.66 %. The density and taper were adequate in 96.5 % and 98.16 % of the teeth, respectively. There were no significant differences among the parameters of length, taper, density, or procedural errors relative to the arch type. However, there was a significant difference between the anterior and premolar teeth in terms of taper, density, and overall quality of the root canal filling. The overall quality of root canal treatment was acceptable in 527 teeth (87.68 %), with no significant difference between teeth (P = 0.256). Conclusion: The quality of root canal treatment performed by undergraduate students using a single-file reciprocating system is good or acceptable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.