AI Efficiency in Dentistry: Comparing Artificial Intelligence Systems with Human Practitioners in Assessing Several Periodontal Parameters

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in healthcare, including dental and periodontal diagnostics, due to its ability to analyze complex datasets with speed and precision. <i>Backgrounds and Objectives:</i> This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of AI-assisted dental-periodontal diagnoses compared to diagnoses made by senior specialists, specialists, and general dentists. <i>Material and Methods:</i> A comparative study was conducted involving 60 practitioners divided into three groups-general dentists, specialists, and senior specialists-along with an AI diagnostic system (Planmeca Romexis 6.4.7.software). Participants evaluated six high-quality panoramic radiographic images representing various dental and periodontal conditions. Diagnoses were compared against a reference "gold standard" validated by a dental imaging expert and senior clinician. A statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 26.0, applying chi-square tests, ANOVA, and Bonferroni correction to ensure robust results. <i>Results:</i> AI's consistency in identifying subtle conditions was comparable to that of senior specialists, while general dentists showed greater variability in their evaluations. The key findings revealed that AI and senior specialists consistently demonstrated the highest performance in detecting attachment loss and alveolar bone loss, with AI achieving a mean score of 6.12 in identifying teeth with attachment loss, compared to 5.43 for senior specialists, 4.58 for specialists, and 3.65 for general dentists. The ANOVA highlighted statistically significant differences between groups, particularly in the detection of attachment loss on the maxillary arch (F = 3.820, <i>p</i> = 0.014). Additionally, AI showed high consistency in detecting alveolar bone loss, with comparable performance to senior specialists. <i>Conclusions:</i> AI systems exhibit significant potential as reliable tools for dental and periodontal assessment, complementing the expertise of human practitioners. However, further validation in clinical settings is necessary to address limitations such as algorithmic bias and atypical cases. AI integration in dentistry can enhance diagnostic precision and patient outcomes while reducing variability in clinical assessments.

Ähnliche Arbeiten