csldlC saiddododnlClacinilC
0
Did not record chief complaint
Diagnosis
Incorrect or missing two or more diagnostic
tests
Complete lack of radiographic interpretations
1
Chief complaint recorded
History recorded
Provisional diagnosis correct
Diagnostic tests and records complete
Proper number of control teeth
Some guidance needed
Difficulty in interpretation of preoperative
radiograph/s
pulpal or periapical diagnosis incorrect
2
Chief complaint, history and provisional
diagnosis complete and comprehensive
Diagnostic tests and records completed
independently
Good interpretation preoperative
radiograph/s
Pulpal and periapical diagnosis correct
Presence of caries or previous materials or
unsupported tooth structure
Removal of caries, restoration and
unsupported tooth structure with some
guidance
Complete removal of caries, restoration and
unsupported tooth structure completed
independently
Faulty access cavity location and shape with
weakening of tooth structure
Access cavity shape, size and/or location is
slightly off but acceptable
No destruction of tooth structure (marginal
ridges, incisal edge, cusp tip)
Correct shape, size and location of outline
form
Failure to de-roof the pulp chamber or parts of
it
Access Cavity
Failure to detect patent main canals
Lack of straight line access
Gouging of pulp walls and floor and incorrect
alignment causing significant weakening of
tooth structure
Perforation with poor prognosis or
unrepairable coronal perforation
Complete de-roofing of the pulp chamber
Detection of main patent canal/s with some
difficulty
Straight line access to the root canal/s with
Good coronal flaring with some guidance
Access cavity reasonably extended and aligned
Perforation in difficult case (due to challenging
accessibility) that is repaired appropriately
(student should be encouraged to repair this
perforation if within his/her abilities, some
assistance accepted)
Detection of main patent root canal orifice/s
Detection of extra canals with or without
guidance
Straight line access to the root canal/s with
Good coronal flaring performed independently
Minimal adequate access cavity extension
Pulp chamber walls untouched with bur
Pulp chamber floor untouched with bur
csldlC saiddododnlClacinilC
Working
Length
Incorrect selection of initial apical file size
(very loose in canal in coronal and apical
direction).
Poor file selection corrected
Selection of proper initial file size
independently
Lack of reproducible reference point
Poor reference point corrected
Selection of reproducible reference point
Did not use electronic apex locator (EAL)
Some guidance needed in use of EAL
EAL used independently and proficiently
Poor quality working length radiograph
Good quality radiograph
Good interpretation of working length
radiograph with some guidance
Good quality radiograph without retake
Good interpretation of W.L radiograph
Failure to correct long or short working length
in a patent canal
Incorrect master file (MAF) selection (too
loose in canal and/or no resistance to apical
pressure)
Poor quality master apical file radiograph
NaOCl not used for irrigation
Irrigant forced beyond apex (hypoclorite
accident)
Irrigation needle too large
Cleaning
&
Shaping
Canal instrumented beyond WL or too short
form WL
Uncorrectable error during preparation
(blockage, separated instrument, ledge,
perforation)
Incomplete removal of previous obturation
material in retreatment case.
Complete lack of flare (unable to insert
selected spreader to WL-1mm)
Over-flare significantly weakening tooth
structure
Working length within 1 mm of canal terminus
MAF fits snugly at WL
Resists apical pressure
Good quality radiograph
Good interpretation of radiograph with some
guidance
Good quality of radiograph without retake
good interpretation of master file radiograph
NaOCl used for irrigation with correct needle
gauge and application (loose in canal)
Use of NaOCl irrigant with good needle size
Needle taken to 2 mm from WL (with rubber
stopper) fitting loosely
Instrumentation to WL after some corrections
Instrumentation to WL independently
Preparation error corrected with guidance
Smooth continuous walls free of errors.
In retreatment case: previous obturation
material completely removed based on
radiographic and clinical measures.
Selected spreader is inserted 1mm short of WL
Tooth structure respected
csldlC saiddododnlClacinilC
Root Canal
obturation
Master GP cone not at WL
Master GP cone not resisting apical or coronal
displacement
Master cone seated to WL
Size fits with good resistance to apical
displacement
Acceptable resistance to coronal displacement
Master cone radiograph of poor quality
Good quality radiograph
Obturation extruded 2 mm or more beyond
the apex
Gutta percha above cervical line/on pulp floor
Obturation material on walls or floor of access
cavity
Lack of tapered root filling
More than one void in root filling
Poor radiographic homogeneity
Lack of coronal seal
Use of Cavit temporary filling
Cotton pellet or large gap between restoration
and GP (when no post space is needed)
Short obturation corrected to proper WL
GP seared off to correct level with some
guidance
Access cavity completely clean
Root filling with adequate taper with
assistance
Acceptable density and homogeneity of
obturation (minimal voids at mid root level)
Adequate coronal seal (IRM, GIC, or final
restoration)
No marginal overhangs
Master cone seated to WL
Good resistance to coronal and apical
displacement
Proper apical extension of obturation without
error
GP seared off at cervical line level (anterior
tooth) and pulp floor (posterior tooth)
Access cavity completely clean
Root filling with adequate taper without
assistance
Dense homogenous root canal filling