Journal of Dental Education最新文献

Biochemistry forms the foundation for understanding biomolecules and molecular processes crucial to dental and oral biology. However, it is often perceived as a challenging subject for dental students with diverse educational backgrounds. Analogies are a pedagogical tool that helps explain new and abstract concepts in biochemistry. The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted teaching and learning activities, prompting shifts in instructional models. This cross-sectional study evaluates dental students' perceptions of analogies in biochemistry education through surveys conducted at the National University of Singapore. Participants included pre-pandemic (2019) and post-pandemic (2024) dental student cohorts, consisting of 57 and 64 students, respectively. Both cohorts reported overwhelmingly positive responses toward the usefulness of analogies, with average scores of 4.6 ± 0.6 in 2019 and 4.7 ± 0.5 in 2024. Most students indicated that analogies enhanced their visualization of abstract concepts (100% in 2019 and 96.9% in 2024) and improved knowledge retention (82.5% in 2019 and 68.8% in 2024). However, a small proportion of students noted that analogies are taken literally and difficult to differentiate from reality (5.3% in 2019 and 4.7% in 2024). Students generally found analogies associated with unfamiliar topics to be more memorable. These findings suggest that analogies remain a relevant and effective tool in biochemistry education, even amid shifts in educational delivery models.

Objective: Simulation-based learning (SBL) in oral radiology offers a safe, structured environment that supports students' transition to clinical practice. However, limited research has captured students' perceptions of SBL for intraoral radiography training. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of dental students about SBL in intraoral radiography using a mixed-methods approach across two dental institutions.

Methods: Third-year undergraduate dental students from two institutions were recruited. All students were trained on both periapical (paralleling technique in Institution A and bisecting angle technique in Institution B) and bitewing radiographs using a mannequin. Data were collected through a 9-item Likert-scale survey and three open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U test, while qualitative data underwent thematic analysis.

Results: A total of 44 students expressed overall positive perceptions of SBL, with a mean score of 4.27. The highest-rated item was "Readiness for clinical transition" (mean = 4.53), and the lowest was "Realism" (mean = 3.81). Institution A students showed significantly more positive responses than those from Institution B in items: develop self-confidence, skill development, and skill mastery through repetition. Thematic analysis supported quantitative findings and revealed four key themes. Students valued the role of SBL in skill development, providing a psychologically safe learning environment, and bridging theory and practice. Students noted barriers about mannequin realism, technical challenges, and access issues. They also provided suggestions for improving the SBL experience.

Conclusion: The findings indicate that students value SBL as an effective approach for teaching core oral radiology skills and preparing students for clinical training. Enhancing mannequin design and practice opportunities may further improve undergraduate learning experiences in simulated settings.

Purpose/objectives: This study investigated the effect of multiple patient and treatment-related factors, together with supervision frequency of assigned attending faculty, on orthodontic treatment duration in an advanced education clinic.

Methods: This study included 295 patients who completed non-surgical orthodontic treatment at the Ohio State University graduate orthodontic clinic during 2016-2020, whose active treatment duration was calculated. Fifteen factors, including patients' age, sex, Medicaid eligibility, number of broken and urgent appointments, initial and final Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index, PAR improvement, occurrence of transfers, extraction or non-extraction plan, midcourse treatment plan change, extended adjustment interval, and frequency of assigned faculty supervision, were collected. Intra-rater reliability of data acquisition was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa tests for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Effects of these factors on treatment duration were assessed by an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) test.

Results: Intra-rater reliability for data acquisition was excellent (ICC or kappa > 0.9) except for treatment plan change. For effects on treatment duration, statistical significance (p < 0.05) was reached for the number of broken and urgent appointments, initial PAR score, supervision frequency of assigned faculty, occurrence of transfer among residents, and major treatment plan change. As for clinical significance (reflected by estimates of impact), an increase in the number of broken/urgent appointments and the occurrence of transfer prolonged treatment duration more substantially than a decrease in faculty supervision frequency.

Conclusion: To avoid prolonging treatment duration in graduate orthodontic clinics, efforts to reduce patients' broken/urgent appointments and transfers among residents are more important than maximizing assigned faculty supervision frequency.

Dental anatomy is fundamental in predoctoral dental education, providing essential knowledge that fosters good clinical practices. Although technology-enhanced teaching modalities have emerged in dental anatomy education, their comparative effectiveness in supporting the development of subsequent clinical skills remains inadequately explored. In this retrospective study, we compared three dental anatomy teaching modalities among first-year dental students (n = 326): traditional in-person instruction using human extracted teeth, alongside online and hybrid formats incorporating a 3D virtual tooth library. Learning outcomes were assessed through written examinations and preclinical operative skills evaluation, including Class I, II, and III cavity preparations; Class I and II amalgam restorations; and Class II, III, IV, and V composite restorations. ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc tests and Pearson's correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis (p < 0.05). While dental anatomy midterm scores showed no significant differences across modalities, traditional instruction yielded significantly higher final examination scores (92.04 ± 5.12) compared to online (86.59 ± 6.15) and hybrid (85.69 ± 6.77) formats (p < 0.05). Students receiving traditional instruction demonstrated superior cavity preparation skills (76.5 ± 9.75), whereas the hybrid cohort excelled in restoration techniques (78.4 ± 6.43). Correlation analyses showed weak associations (r < 0.20) between dental anatomy final scores and subsequent performance measures. These findings demonstrate the complementary nature of traditional and technology-enhanced instruction in dental education, while revealing that theoretical knowledge and practical skills are more distinct than previously assumed, suggesting a need for domain-specific teaching strategies that optimize each area independently.

Background: Empathy is stressed as an important component of patient-centered practice and training within the dental profession, yet assessment of both cognitive and affective empathy among dental students in a US dental school model is sparse.

Aim: To determine if dental students' cognitive and affective empathy differs by class year, gender, and age in a US dental school model.

Methods: This cross-sectional study examined self-reported empathy levels of first to fourth year dental students from a US dental school, using the Jefferson Scale of Empathy-Health Profession Students (JSE-HPS) and the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ). Questions were scored using a 1-7 Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree); associations were tested using ANOVA and two-sample t-tests.

Results: Two-thirds of the dental students (66%) took the survey, n = 280. Most were female (50%), between 19 and 24 years old (52%), and in their first or second year of dental school (66%). The average JSE-HPS score was 112 ± 11 and the average TEQ score was 91 ± 11. JSE-HPS scores were significantly different between dental classes (p = 0.012). Fourth year students had significantly lower JSE-HPS scores than the first and third year students (108 vs. 114 and 114; Tukey's p = 0.022 and 0.044). Females and students < 25 years demonstrated significantly higher empathy both JSE-HP and TEQ. Cognitive and affective empathy measures were positively associated (Pearson r = 0.63, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Dental educators should be aware of changes in student empathy levels during dental training to support and promote empathy development across class years within the US dental school model.