Abstract
Introduction Reversal of enamel-only proximal caries by non-invasive treatments is important in preventive dentistry. However, detecting such caries using bitewing radiography is difficult, and the subtle patterns are often missed by dental practitioners.
Aims To investigate whether the ability of dentists to detect enamel-only proximal caries is enhanced by the use of AssistDent® Artificial Intelligence (AI) software.
Materials and Methods In the ADEPT (AssistDent Enamel-only Proximal caries assessmenT) study, twenty-three dentists were randomly divided into a control arm, without AI assistance, and an experimental arm in which AI assistance provided on-screen prompts indicating potential enamel-only proximal caries. All participants analysed a set of 24 bitewings in which an expert panel had previously identified 65 enamel-only carious lesions and 241 healthy proximal surfaces.
Results The control group found 44.3% of the caries, whereas the experimental group found 75.8%. The experimental group incorrectly identified caries in 14.6% of the healthy surfaces compared to 3.7% in the control group. The increase in sensitivity of 71% and decrease in specificity of 11% are statistically significant (p<0.01).
Conclusions AssistDent® Artificial Intelligence software significantly improves dentists’ ability to detect enamel-only proximal caries and could be considered as a tool to support preventive dentistry in general practice.
Key Points Enamel-only proximal caries are often missed by dentists when examining bitewing radiographs.
The use of AssistDent® Artificial Intelligence software results in a 71% increase in ability to detect enamel-only proximal caries accompanied by a 11% decrease in specificity.
Artificial Intelligence software could be considered as a tool to support preventive dentistry in general practice.
Competing Interest Statement
HD, JG and TW are employees, of Manchester Imaging Ltd. The Division of Dentistry, University of Manchester, purchased a software licence for AssistDent@[reg] from Manchester Imaging Ltd. MA is not an employee of Manchester Imaging Ltd and declares no conflict of interest.
Clinical Trial
Manchester University Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 2020-9892-15955)
Funding Statement
No external funding was received
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Manchester University Research Ethics Committee
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Clarification throughout paper. Additional supplementary data.
Data Availability
All data is provided in the main paper
