Efficacy and Feasibility of OptraDam® Plus Versus Conventional Rubber Dams in Preclinical Simulation Training: A Randomized Crossover Trial

Background/Objectives: Despite clear benefits, conventional rubber dam use remains low due to barriers that often originate during undergraduate training. To examine a potential approach to mitigating these barriers, this study evaluated the efficacy and feasibility of OptraDam® Plus, a user-friendly alternative to the conventional rubber dam, in preclinical simulation training. Methods: In this 2 × 2 crossover trial, preclinical undergraduate students were randomly assigned to two groups to perform two types of dental isolation, conventional rubber dam and OptraDam® Plus, in alternating sequences on a dental simulator. The efficacy and feasibility of both systems were evaluated based on application time, isolation quality, and students’ perceptions. Results: Data from 94 randomized students were collected and analyzed. Although students’ performance was suboptimal with both systems, there were significant differences in efficacy and feasibility between them. Application time was shorter with the conventional rubber dam (mean reduction 77 s; 95% CI 4–151; p = 0.039), whereas using OptraDam® Plus was associated with 51% lower odds of achieving a higher isolation quality category (OR 0.49; p = 0.011). In addition, students perceived the conventional rubber dam to be superior to the OptraDam® Plus in achieving higher-quality dental isolation and in their confidence in using it. Conclusions: OptraDam® Plus cannot be considered a suitable alternative to the conventional rubber dam in preclinical simulation training due to its inferior efficacy and feasibility. The findings of this study challenge the assumption that utilization of newer marketed “user-friendly” rubber dam systems necessarily overcome the core technical barriers faced by undergraduate students.