Journal of Dental Education最新文献

Purpose/objectives: This study examined the relationship between environmental factors (e.g., working position, patient position, and scaling instruments) and poor posture in dental hygiene students.

Methods: A longitudinal cohort study was conducted from 2017 to 2019 to observe dental hygiene students' clinical rotation performance at two undergraduate universities. Samples of video observations (n = 1487) of dental hygiene students performing scaling activities during oral care sessions were evaluated using the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Descriptive analysis and exploratory prediction modeling were performed to assess clinical environmental factors that predicted higher risks of developing WMSDs.

Results: RULA scores (mean = 4.8, median = 5, range = 2-7) indicate dental hygiene students are at high risk of developing upper extremity MSDs. The type of scaling instrument, clock positioning relative to the patient, and sitting versus standing had statistically significant associations (p < 0.001) with the RULA outcome. In univariate analyses, clock positions 7 and 8 were the worst, having an increased risk of poor RULA outcomes (scores 5-7) by nearly nine times over working in clock position 12 (odds ratio [OR] 9.11, 95% CI 5.48-15.60). Multivariate predictive modeling indicated that the riskiest combination of factors is using a manual scaling instrument (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.28-2.18), standing (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.03-1.96), and working clock positions 7 and 8 (OR 8.4, 95% CI 5.02-14.50).

Conclusions: There is a need to consider the combined contribution of multiple environmental factors on working positions to optimize ergonomic training during dental hygiene and protect emerging dental health professionals from the negative health impacts of prolonged awkward postures.

Purpose/objectives: Several studies have evaluated resident and trainee remediation strategies across various surgical subspecialties. However, limited research exists on this topic within the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMS) literature. The purpose of this study was to identify cross-sectional patterns of evaluation and remediation strategies for underperforming OMS residents in the United States.

Methods: A cross-sectional cohort study was conducted using a 22-question survey administered to OMS residency Program Directors of all programs approved by the Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) within the United States. The predictor variables included the demographics and resident assessment methods of responding programs. The outcome variables included the results of remediation strategies and corrective action plans for residents identified as struggling over the preceding 10 years. Responses were anonymized, and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the collected data.

Results: Completed surveys were obtained from 29 (29%) CODA-approved programs. Twenty-five of 29 (86%) programs reported placing 64 residents on corrective action plans. Nine of 29 (31%) programs reported that 14 residents were dismissed during that period. The most common deficiencies in residents requiring corrective action plans were cognitive skills (37.9%), clinical skills (20.7%), and interpersonal skills (20.7%). Residents were almost always given a warning prior to initiating remediation or probation (96.6%), with verbal (46.4%) and written (53.4%) warnings being used with nearly equivalent frequency. Remedial action most often included general counseling (15.9%), more frequent feedback sessions (15.9%), assignment of a mentor (15.2%), didactic remediation (13.3%), psychiatric/psychologic counseling (11.26%), and lengthened training time (6.6%). Most programs reported utilization of a formal remediation protocol (75.9%) and 85.7% of programs subjectively felt their process was effective. Almost one-quarter of respondents (24.1%) stated that no formal remediation protocol exists at their institution.

Conclusions: Most OMS programs utilized some form of remediation protocols, but their usage was inconsistent and infrequent. The evaluation and remediation processes among OMS residency programs have significant variability, relying heavily on program or institution-specific protocols.

Purpose/objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of the digital-conventional integrated teaching method on prosthetics preclinically in full crown preparation courses.

Methods: Fifty-eight undergraduate dental students were randomly divided into a conventional group (CG) and a digital-conventional integrated group (DG). The preclinical course was composed of two phases. In the first phase, students from both groups were trained in full crown preparation with the conventional teaching method. In the second phase, the students in the CG group were still trained with the conventional teaching method, whereas the students in the DG group practiced with a digital real-time training and evaluation system. The crown preparation test was conducted after training. The reduction amount, margin, taper, undercuts, finishing status and protection of the adjacent tooth and gingiva were evaluated by senior experts. Crown preparations were also graded by a digital assessment system. Students' opinions were investigated with questionnaires.

Results: The differences between the scores for the CG and DG groups were not significant, as evaluated by experts (p = 0.398) and a digital assessment system (p = 0.075). The questionnaires response rate was 100%. The digital-conventional integrated teaching method had a significantly higher score for the preparation sequence (p = 0.002), according to the questionnaires. The conventional teaching method had significantly higher scores for efficiency (p < 0.001), posture (p = 0.010) and preference (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The digital-conventional integrated teaching method can achieve the same effect as the conventional teaching method in crown preparation training. It is beneficial for students to master the preparation sequence and is likely to be promising in preclinical full crown preparation courses.

Objective: This study examines employer expectations within the dental public health (DPH) profession and evaluates the alignment of DPH training programs with workforce demands, identifying critical gaps and opportunities for improvement.

Methods: A qualitative analysis of DPH job postings requiring five or fewer years of experience was conducted across multiple platforms, including LinkedIn, Google Job Postings, Indeed, ADEA, ASTDD, NNOHA, and USA Jobs. Position domains, descriptions, preferred, and required qualifications were systematically categorized to identify trends and workforce expectations.

Results: Of 102 DPH positions analyzed, the most common job domains were community-based (C-B) clinical (39.2%) and academia (19.6%). Leadership (90%), healthcare administration (86%), and clinical experience (64%) were the most commonly preferred skills across all positions. Analysis of DPH positions excluding C-B clinical positions revealed that 53% of position descriptions referenced clinical responsibilities, while 57% required clinical experience. These responsibilities included supervising students in C-B clinical education or providing clinical guidance within administrative roles.

Conclusions: The findings underscore the increasing demand for clinical experience in traditionally non-clinical DPH positions, signaling a shift toward integrated roles that combine public health expertise with clinical practice. This highlights a disconnect between current DPH training programs and market demands, emphasizing the need to incorporate clinical training and leadership development into curricula. Transitioning to an integrated residency model incorporating a clinical competency inspired by preventive medicine frameworks could align graduate preparedness with workforce needs, enhance employability, and strengthen the impact of DPH professionals in advancing oral and overall health equity.

Purpose/objective: The prevalence of food insecurity (FI) on university campuses is increasing. This study explored the prevalence of food and nutrition insecurity (NI) among dental students and barriers and interventions to address them.

Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted. Validated tools were used to assess FI and NI. Univariate binary logistic regressions and a multivariable logistic regression model identified factors independently associated with FI.

Results: The response rate was 11.9% (n = 67). The mean age was 28.4 years; 67% were D1/D2 students; 53.7% were female, 15.2% identified as Hispanic, and 50.7% as White. Forty percent experienced FI; 24.2% had low nutrition security (NS), and 26.9% reported partial or full responsibility for others' living expenses. Twenty-four percent were married, 25.8% used a food pantry; 11.1% had unsuccessfully applied for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. In the adjusted model, low NS, nonmarried status, and food pantry use increased the likelihood of FI (odds ratios of 16.854, 10.182, and 9.123, respectively). Common barriers and potential interventions to address FI and NI were explored.

Conclusions: The prevalence of FI in this sample was greater than the national average. Those who were unmarried, had low NS, and used a food pantry were significantly more likely to have FI. Proposed interventions include student services enhancements and curriculum modifications on nutrition and wellness. Further research is necessary with a larger sample to understand factors contributing to NI and FI among dental students.

Background: Needlestick exposures commonly occur with non-disposable metal syringes during the assembly and disassembly of needles due to the manual handling of needles. Disposable syringes are designed to reduce these exposures by using a protective sheath thus eliminating the need to handle needles while uncapping and recapping them.

Purpose: This pilot study compared the two syringes with two alternating groups of third-year (D3) students during clinical practice under faculty supervision to administer local anesthesia to live patients.

Methods: In 2023, two groups of Year 3 (D3) Doctor of Dental Surgery (DDS) students supervised by faculty in each group alternated over two 4-week sessions using disposable (N = 67) and non-disposable (N = 66) syringes to administer local anesthesia injections to live patients. At the end of each session, each group and supervising faculty completed a survey to capture their experience.

Results: While two participants reported needlestick injuries using non-disposable syringes and no injuries incurred using disposable syringes, we found neither a statistically significant increase nor decrease in exposures related to needlesticks using either syringe. Statistically significant outcomes showed that the participants found the non-disposable easier to use and they were more likely to use it going forward than the disposable syringe. Participants preferred using the non-disposable syringe mainly because of the stability and familiarity aspects of prior education. The disposable syringe, while easier and safer to assemble and disassemble, felt less stable to use during the injection procedure, especially during aspiration.

Conclusion: While safety continues to be a concern, students and faculty prefer non-disposable metal syringes over disposable syringes. Most dissatisfaction with using the disposable syringe came from the aspiration system. But prior experience and comfort using non-disposable metal syringes, a lack of experience and confidence with local anesthesia procedures and a lack of experience with disposable syringes, may have contributed to these outcomes. Despite usability issues with the disposable syringe, performance was more impacted by lack of experience than the type of syringe used. Introducing both syringes early into the curriculum may help overcome usability factors, further reduce needlestick exposures, and prepare students for different workplace environments. Providing adequate training for faculty, especially on the differences between the two syringes, such as aspiration, will help alleviate discomfort and better promote the use of both.