MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online search was conducted in Nov 2021 of all the dental schools in ten English-language speaking countries (U.S., Canada, U.K., Ireland, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia) to identify departments/divisions in the disciplines of periodontology, cariology, and conservative/restorative/operative dentistry. The results were then compared against the findings of a similar investigation that was conducted from July to October 2008.
RESULTS: Of the 126 dental schools identified in 2021, information was available for 93 dental schools. Of these 93 schools, only 10 listed departments/divisions/disciplines of cariology, whereas 83 and 86 schools had listed periodontology and conservative/restorative/operative dentistry, respectively. Despite a doubling of the number of dental schools with a department/division/discipline of cariology from 2008 to 2021, the absolute gap in the number of departments/divisions/disciplines in the other two disciplines compared to cariology had widened during the thirteen years. In 2008, there were 70 more departments/divisions/disciplines in periodontology compared to cariology departments/divisions/disciplines. In 2021, there were 73 more departments/divisions/disciplines in periodontology. Additional information on research output was available for 90 dental schools in 2021, where 30 schools self-identified as undertaking cariology research, whereas 68 and 47 schools undertook research in periodontology and conservative/restorative/operative dentistry, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Dental education does not give equal emphasis to periodontology and cariology, and the discipline of cariology is grossly neglected.
METHODS: Potential relevant undergraduate paediatric dentistry topics were initially drafted and revised according to the revised national competency statement. The final draft included 65 topics clustered under 18 domains. A fuzzy Delphi method was used and experts who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were invited to anonymously ranked the importance of relevant topics using a five-point Likert scale and proposed suitable cognitive and psychomotor levels for each topic. Fuzzy evaluation was then performed, and experts were considered to have reached a consensus if the following three conditions were achieved: (a). the difference between the average and expert rating data was ≤ 0.2; (b). the average expert consensus was ˃70%; and (c). the average fuzzy number was ≥ 0.5. Subsequently, the mean ratings were used to determine the cognitive and psychomotor levels.
RESULTS: 20 experts participated in the survey. 64 out of 65 paediatric dentistry topics were deemed acceptable. The average fuzzy number ranged from 0.36 to 0.85, while the average Likert score ranged from 3.05 to 5.00. The topic "Dental amalgam" was rejected based on expert consensus since the average fuzzy number was 0.36. The most significant topic was "Pit and fissure sealant", followed by "Preventive advice", "Early childhood caries", "Dental caries in children & adolescent", "Management of dental caries in paediatric patients", and "Consent" which were equally ranked as the second most important topics. According to Bloom's and Simpson's taxonomies, most of the paediatric dentistry topics were rated adequate for undergraduate students at the cognitive level of "Apply" (C3) and a psychomotor level of "Guided response" (P3).
CONCLUSION: The current study successfully identified relevant undergraduate paediatric dentistry topics using the fuzzy Delphi method, which can facilitate future educators to improve existing Malaysian undergraduate paediatric dental curricula.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional web-based questionnaire survey was done among new dental graduates of the academic year 2019-2020 and the final year undergraduate students (academic year 2020-2021) from dental schools in Malaysia, using the Dental Undergraduates Preparedness Assessment Scale (DU-PAS), from 6th to 26th April 2021. The questionnaire addressed clinical skill competence, and cognitive and behavioral attributes. The number of respondents needed to achieve a confidence level of 95% with margin of error of 5% was 306.
RESULTS: A total of 453 (243 final year students and 210 new graduates) responded from dental schools nationwide, with a response rate of 30.6%. The overall mean score for preparedness for dental practice was 76.3±14.7, for clinical skills 39.7±7.3, and behavioral and cognitive attributes 36.5±9.1. New graduates had significantly higher mean preparedness score (78.6±14.4) as compared to students in their final year (74.2±14.7). Performing endodontic treatment on multi-rooted teeth had the lowest perceived competency (29.8%), followed by assessing treatment needs of patients requiring orthodontics (37.1%), prescribing drugs (46.6%) and providing crowns using principles of tooth preservation (48.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: Satisfactory scores were obtained for most attributes. The final-year cohort was significantly less prepared for dental practice compared to the newly graduated cohort.
METHODS: TCTM that was previously pilot tested was implemented as a value addition in Public Health Dentistry for two academic years. Changes in knowledge, attitude, ability to identify oral manifestations, self-confidence, and skills (KAASS) in tobacco counseling were assessed before and after implementation of TCTM. Mean pre and post intervention scores were compared.
RESULTS: Mean scores for knowledge, attitude, ability to identify oral manifestations, and self-confidence (KAAS) at baseline were 4.4 ± 0.9, 5.1 ± 0.7, 4.5 ± 1.1, and 1.3 ± 0.4, respectively. Mean KAAS scores post intervention were 13.5 ± 1.0, 8.7 ± 0.4, 9.4 ± 0.7, and 3.5 ± 0.5, respectively. There was a significant improvement in the mean KAAS score post intervention compared to baseline. Tobacco counseling skills also significantly improved among the participants following implementation of the training module (68.8%) did well compared to the baseline (0%).
CONCLUSION: TCTM was effective in enhancing knowledge, attitude, ability to identify oral manifestations, and self-confidence in tobacco counseling among undergraduate dental students.
Methods: A TCTM for students of dentistry was developed using ADDIE framework as a guide. Content and construct validation of the module was done by six subject experts using Delphi technique for obtaining consensus. Pilot testing was done on 20 students of third year BDS. Pre- and post-intervention assessment of knowledge, attitude, self-confidence was done using learning outcomes questionnaire. Ability to correctly identify oral manifestations was assessed using extended item MCQs and tobacco counseling skills using a modified KEECC. The difference in mean scores were computed and subjected to further statistical analysis using SPSS version 22.
Results: There was a significant improvement in post intervention scores for mean knowledge (5.5 ± 1.4 to 13.2 ± 1.1), attitude (5.6 ± 0.9 and 8.5 ± 0.5), self-confidence (1.5 ± 0.5 and 3.1 ± 0.2), ability to correctly identify oral manifestations (5.2 ± 1.4 and 9.4 ± 0.8) and tobacco counseling skills.
Conclusion: It is possible to introduce the module in the existing curriculum and its effectiveness evaluation shows benefit in terms of Kirkpatrick's Level 1, 2, 3 (improvement in knowledge, attitude, self-confidence, ability to identify oral manifestations, and tobacco counseling skills) of training effectiveness.
METHODS: Clinical audit learning was introduced in Year 3 of a 5-year curriculum for dental undergraduates. During classroom activities, students were briefed on clinical audit, selected their audit topics in groups of 5 or 6 students, and prepared and presented their audit protocols. One chosen topic was RCT, in which 3 different cohorts of Year 3 students conducted retrospective audits of patients' records in 2012, 2014 and 2015 for their compliance with recommended record keeping criteria and their performance in RCT. Students were trained by and calibrated against an endodontist (κ ≥ 0.8). After each audit, the findings were reported in class, and recommendations were made for improvement in performance of RCT and record keeping. Students' compliance with published guidelines was presented and their RCT performances in each year were compared using the chi-square test.
RESULTS: Overall compliance with of record keeping guidelines was 44.1% in 2012, 79.6% in 2014 and 94.6% in 2015 (P = .001). In the 2012 audit, acceptable extension, condensation and the absence of mishap were observed in 72.4, 75.7% and 91.5%; in the 2014 audit, 95.1%, 64.8% and 51.4%; and in 2015 audit, 96.4%, 82.1% and 92.8% of cases, respectively. In 2015, 76.8% of root canal fillings met all 3 technical quality criteria when compared to 48.6% in 2014 and 44.7% in 2012 (P = .001).
CONCLUSION: Clinical audit-feedback cycle is an effective educational tool for improving dental undergraduates' compliance with record keeping and performance in the technical quality of RCT.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Faculty of Dentistry, Melaka-Manipal Medical College among 3(rd) and 4(th) year BDS students. A total of 145 dental students, who consented, participate in the study. Students were divided into 14 groups. Nine online sessions followed by nine face-to-face discussions were held. Each session addressed topics related to oral lesions and orofacial pain with pharmacological applications. After each week, students were asked to reflect on blended learning. On completion of 9 weeks, reflections were collected and analyzed.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Qualitative analysis was done using thematic analysis model suggested by Braun and Clarke.
RESULTS: The four main themes were identified, namely, merits of blended learning, skill in writing prescription for oral diseases, dosages of drugs, and identification of strengths and weakness. In general, the participants had a positive feedback regarding blended learning. Students felt more confident in drug selection and prescription writing. They could recollect the doses better after the online and face-to-face sessions. Most interestingly, the students reflected that they are able to identify their strength and weakness after the blended learning sessions.
CONCLUSIONS: Blended learning module was successfully implemented for reinforcing dental pharmacology. The results obtained in this study enable us to plan future comparative studies to know the effectiveness of blended learning in dental pharmacology.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the present study is to investigate the faculty opinions toward the existing e-learning activities, and to analyse the extent of adopting and integration of e-learning into their traditional teaching methods.
METHODS: A cross sectional study was conducted among faculties of Medicine and Dentistry using pre-tested questionnaires. The data was analyzed by using the statistical package for social science, SPSS, version 16.0.
RESULTS: The result of our survey indicates that majority of our faculty (65.4%) held positive opinion towards e-learning. Among the few, who demonstrated reservations, it is attributed to their average level of skills and aptitude in the use of computers that was statistically significant (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Our study brings to light the need for formal training as perquisite to support e-learning that enables smooth transition of the faculty from their traditional teaching methods into blended approach. Our results are anticipated to strengthen the existing e-learning activities of our college and other universities and convincingly adopt e-learning as a viable teaching and learning strategy.