Holographic visualization shows no significant preparation-quality advantage in dental training

A randomized controlled trial involving 60 undergraduate dental students found no statistically significant advantage for holographic three-dimensional visualization over conventional two-dimensional photographs when assessing the quality of minimally invasive veneer preparations. Both groups improved substantially from their baseline attempts, while the adjusted between-group difference was 0.60 points, with a 95% confidence interval of -0.48 to 1.67 points and a p value of 0.269. Students who received holographic visualization did report the largest observed effect in spatial understanding, although that difference was not significant after correction for multiple comparisons. The study therefore supports acceptance and a possible educational role for the technology, but not a measured improvement in immediate preparation quality.

The trial, published in BMC Medical Education, was designed to examine holographic visualization during preclinical training in prosthodontics, where students must develop spatial understanding and psychomotor precision. Sixty undergraduates were randomly assigned, 30 to each condition, to receive either conventional two-dimensional photographic visualization or holographic three-dimensional visualization. After a standardized calibration session and a baseline veneer preparation, participants completed a second preparation following exposure to their assigned visualization modality. The researchers used this before-and-after structure to measure change within each group, while also adjusting the between-group comparison for baseline performance. The trial was prospectively registered in the German Clinical Trials Register on 22 June 2026 under the identifier DRKS00040713.

Preparation quality was evaluated independently by two blinded evaluators using a predefined scoring rubric. Within-group changes were analyzed with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and differences between groups were assessed with analysis of covariance adjusted for baseline performance. Student-reported educational outcomes were compared using Mann–Whitney U tests with false discovery rate correction. The investigators reported significant improvements in preparation quality from baseline to post-intervention in both groups, with p values below 0.001. That similar pattern of improvement means the principal result was not evidence that holography outperformed photographs; the study did not show a significant preparation-quality advantage for the three-dimensional condition.

Student-reported outcomes were broadly comparable between the two groups. Spatial understanding showed the largest observed between-group effect in favor of holographic visualization, but the difference was not significant after the multiple-comparison correction. Holographic visualization was nevertheless highly accepted: 70% of students supported its future integration into dental education. The findings separate that acceptance from the measured performance result. The technology was popular with students, and the largest observed student-reported difference concerned spatial understanding, but the trial did not establish a statistically significant advantage for either overall student-reported outcomes or immediate veneer-preparation quality.

Overall, the results position holographic visualization as a possible adjunct for teaching complex three-dimensional concepts in preclinical prosthodontic education, rather than as a demonstrated replacement for conventional visual methods or a clearly superior route to better preparation scores. The evidence comes from a single randomized trial of 60 dental undergraduates, a specific veneer-preparation exercise and short-term educational outcomes in simulated training; it does not establish effects in clinical patient care, long-term retention or later professional practice. The authors concluded that holographic visualization may primarily support spatial understanding and may be valuable as an adjunct in preclinical training, but the measured preparation-quality difference between holographic and conventional visualization was not statistically significant.

Subject of Research: Randomized trial of holographic versus two-dimensional visualization in preclinical dental veneer-preparation training

Article Title: Visualizing the future: impact of holographic visualization on teaching minimally invasive veneer preparation: a randomized controlled trial

Article References: Janson, M., Lederer, M. L., Dalhoff, C. M., Barbe, A. G., Liebermann, A., & Schoppmeier, C. M. (2026). Visualizing the future: impact of holographic visualization on teaching minimally invasive veneer preparation: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Medical Education, 26(1), Article 1447. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10324-5

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-026-10324-5

Keywords: randomized controlled trial, dental education, holographic visualization, minimally invasive veneer preparation, spatial understanding, undergraduate dentistry, preclinical training, prosthodontics, three-dimensional visualization, Visualizing, future, impact