title: The evaluation of marginal gap with and without optical aids: clinicians versus technicians.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This study investigated the reliability of visual assessment of marginal gaps in relation to the use of magnification and the operator's profession.
  
  
  METHODS
  A titanium bar was notched, simulating 40 marginal gaps, and 35 operators performed a quantitative evaluation of the incisions.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Visual examination was neither sensitive nor specific, as an extreme variability of data was recorded. The precision of readers improved with magnification aids only for clinicians; technicians were significantly more accurate in evaluating the incision's width.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The visual examinations were inadequate to decide the clinical acceptability of a restoration with regard to its marginal fit.
authors.forename: Gaetano
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Calesini
authors.forename: Costanza
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Micarelli
authors.forename: Andrea
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Fabianelli
authors.forename: Federica
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Papacchini
mesh_terms: D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation / Q000145:classification / Q000592:standards*; D003800:Dental Technicians; D003815:Dentists; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological / Q000502:physiology; D006801:Humans; D007909:Lenses; D008853:Microscopy / Q000295:instrumentation; D013499:Surface Properties; D014785:Vision, Ocular / Q000502:physiology*; D014792:Visual Acuity / Q000502:physiology