Resumen de Impact of using magnifying dental loupes on clinical performance during tooth preparation: a systematic review
Rayanna-Thayse-Florêncio Costa, Samille-Biasi Miranda, Marcos-Antônio-Japiassú-Resende Montes, Anne-Kaline-Claudino Ribeiro, Adriana-da Fonte-Porto Carreiro, Sandra-Lúcia-Dantas Moraes
To assess whether using magnification loupes affects tooth preparation working posture performed by undergraduate students and dentistry professionals and whether it influences the quality of the preparation, operator satisfaction and procedure time.
This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Review (CRD42023482377). Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for relevant articles published up to August 2023. Clinical or laboratory studies evaluating cavities or dental preparations performed with and without magnification loupes were considered eligible. The outcomes were operator working posture, dental preparation quality, operator satisfaction, and procedure time. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the JBI Critical Appraisal tools for Quasi-Experimental Studies.
The searches retrieved 1493 articles. Based on the eligibility criteria, 11 laboratory studies were included, where 410 undergraduate and graduate dental students conducted dental preparations in 1851 dental specimens. Of the 11 selected studies, 6 evaluated the working posture, 6 assessed the quality of the dental preparations, 5 reported operator satisfaction, and 2 assessed procedure time. The results showed that magnifying loupes significantly improved operator working posture, but did not influence the quality of tooth preparations. Although satisfaction reports about experiences with magnifying loupes were favorable, no significant difference was found.
Magnification loupes improved operator working posture. However, clinical studies with more scientific evidence are needed for steady conclusions regarding operator satisfaction and procedural time.
