Skip to main content
. 2024 Aug 14;24:939. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04710-y

Table 4.

Comparison of categorical variables according to the apex locator integrated engine-driven instrumentation preference

Test statistics p*
Apex locator-integrated engine-driven instrumentation preference
Yes No
Year of graduation
 1980–1989 7 (43.8) 9 (56.3) 3.565 0.468
 1990–1999 6 (37.5) 10 (62.5)
 2000–2009 10 (35.7) 18 (64.3)
 2010–2019 74 (51) 71 (49)
 2020- 34 (42.5) 46 (57.5)
Workplace
 Public Hospital 21 (65.6) 11 (34.4) 5.682 0.058
 Private Practise 68 (44.2) 86 (55.8)
 University Hospital 42 (42.4) 57 (57.6)
Title
 General Dentist 73 (51.4) 69 (48.6) 8.807 0.066
 Endodontic residents/Ph.D. students 11 (32.4) 23 (67.6)
 Endodontist 21 (35.6) 38 (64.4)
 Pediatric Dentistry residents/Ph.D. students 15 (60) 10 (40)
 Pediatric Dentist 11 (44) 14 (56)
Do you experience any discrepancies when performing the main cone gutta-percha fit on teeth instrumented with an apex locator-integrated engine-driven endomotor?
Extrude Short
Do you perform passive measurements before instrumentation to determine the working length, in addition to using an apex locator-integrated engine-driven?
 Yes 8 (29.6) 19 (70.4) –- 0.275*
 No 5 (50) 5 (50)
Do you perform passive measurements after instrumentation to determine the working length, in addition to using an integrated apex locator?
 Yes 8 (42.1) 11 (57.9) 0.323 0.570**
 No 5 (27.8) 13 (72.2)
Which kinematics do you prefer for the apex locator-integrated engine-driven mode?
 Reciprocation-Rotation 6 (33.3) 12 (66.7) 0.839 0.804***
 Reciprocation 3 (50) 3 (50)
 Rotation 4 (30.8) 9 (69.2)

*Fisher’s Exact test

**Yates Correction

***Fisher-Freeman-Halton test