Comparison of different teaching methods for tooth extraction

Year 2019, , 271 - 276, 01.09.2019

Yeliz Kılınç , Deniz Yaman Aslı Ayaz Sara Samur Ergüven , Nur Mollaoğlu

https://doi.org/10.21601/ortadogutipdergisi.453651

Abstract

Aim: Undergraduate dental education has been an important issue on oral surgery and there have been many tools to improve the skills of dental students. The aim of this study was to assess two different teaching methods on oral surgery for undergraduate dental education.
Material and Methods: A total of 84 third-year dental students without any declared previous experience on surgery were divided into two groups. Group 1 was given a lecture and slide presentation regarding the extraction of teeth 17 and 37. Group 2 received a demonstration of tooth extraction performed on the plastic skull model in addition to lecture and slide presentation. Baseline knowledge was measured using a questionnaire that consisted of 14-item check list. Data analysis was carried out using the SPSS (version 15) statistical software package. One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and Kruskal Wallis test were performed for the statistical assessment.
Results: Group 2 presented statistically significant better learning scores. Demonstration was determined to be related with higher scores.
Conclusions: The present study reveals that demonstration is more beneficial in teaching basic surgical skills for tooth extraction. Thus, teaching methods are suggested to be performed with demonstration in the preclinical educational programs.

Keywords

dental education, dental students, oral surgery, teaching

Farklı diş çekimi öğretim metodlarının karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Amaç: Diş hekimliği eğitiminde oral cerrahinin yeri önemlidir ve diş hekimliği öğrencilerinin becerilerini geliştirmek için pek çok yöntem mevcuttur. Bu çalışmanın amacı diş hekimliği eğitiminde oral cerrahide iki farklı öğretim yönteminin değerlendirilmesidir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Daha önce oral cerrahi deneyimi olmayan toplam 84 üçüncü sınıf öğrencisi iki gruba ayrıldı. Grup 1’e 17 ve 37 nolu dişlerin çekimi ile ilgili bir ders ve slayt sunumu yapıldı. Grup 2’ye ders ve slayt sunumuna ek olarak kafatası modeli üzerinde diş çekimi demonstrasyonu yapıldı. Temel bilgi kazanımı 14 maddelik kontrol listesinden oluşan bir anket kullanılarak ölçüldü. Veri analizi SPSS (Sürüm 15) istatistik yazılım paketi kullanılarak gerçekleştirildi. İstatistiksel değerlendirme için Kolmogorov Smirnov tek örnek testi ve Kruskal Wallis testi kullanıldı.
Bulgular: Grup 2’de istatistiksel olarak daha anlamlı öğrenme skorları gözlendi. Demonstrasyonun daha yüksek öğrenme skorları ile ilişkili olduğu belirlendi.
Sonuçlar: Bu çalışma diş çekimi için temel cerrahi becerilerin öğretilmesinde model üzerinde yapılan demonstrasyonun daha yararlı olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu nedenle, öğretim yöntemlerinin klinik öncesi eğitim programlarında demonstrasyon ile gerçekleştirilmesi önerilmektedir.

Keywords

Diş hekimliği eğitimi, diş hekimliği öğrencileri, oral cerrahi, öğretme

References

• Rich SK, Keim RG, Shuler CF. Problem-based learning versus a traditional educational methodology: a comparison of preclinical and clinical periodontics performance. J Dent Educ 2005; 69: 649-62.
• Zhang SY, Zheng JW, Yang C, et al. Case-based learning in clinical courses in a Chinese college of stomatology. J Dent Educ 2012; 76: 1389-92.
• Garvey MT, O’Sullivan M, Blake M. Multidisciplinary case‐based learning for undergraduate students. Eur J Dent Educ 2000; 4: 165-8.
• von Bergmann H, Walker J, Dalrymple KR, Shuler CF. Dental Faculty Members’ Pedagogic Beliefs and Curriculum Aims in Problem-Based Learning: An Exploratory Study. J Dent Educ 2017; 81: 937-47. (doi: 10.21815/JDE.017.046).
• Albino JE, Young SK, Neumann LM, et al. Assessing dental students’ competence: best practice recommendations in the performance assessment literature and investigation of current practices in predoctoral dental education. J Dent Educ 2008; 72: 1405-35.
• Chuenjitwongsa S, Oliver RG, Bullock AD. Competence, competency‐based education, and undergraduate dental education: a discussion paper. Eur J Dent Educ 2018; 22: 1-8. (doi: 10.1111/eje.12213). Epub 2016 Jun 1.
• Macluskey M, Hanson C, Kershaw A, Wight AJ, Ogden GR. Development of a structured clinical operative test (SCOT) in the assessment of practical ability in the oral surgery undergraduate curriculum. Br Dent J 2004; 196: 225-8.
• Corrêa L, De Campos AC, Souza SC, Novelli MD. Teaching oral surgery to undergraduate students: a pilot study using a Web‐based practical course. Eur J Dent Educ 2003; 7: 111-5.
• Dantas AK, Shinagawa A, Deboni MC. Assessment of preclinical learning on oral surgery using three instructional strategies. J Dent Educ 2010; 74: 1230-6.
• Ali K, Heffernan E, Lambe P, Coombes L. Use of peer assessment in tooth extraction competency. Eur J Dent Educ 2014; 18: 44-50.
• Norris TE, Cullison SW, Fihn SD. Teaching procedural skills. J Gen Intern Med 1997; 12: 64-70.
• Denadai R, Souto LR. Organic bench model to complement the teaching and learning on basic surgical skills. Acta Cir Bras 2012; 27: 88-94.
• Denadai R, Oshiiwa M, Saad-Hossne R. Does bench model fidelity interfere in the acquisition of suture skills by novice medical students? Rev Assoc Méd Bras (1992) 2012; 58: 600-6.
• Eitner S, Holst S, Wichmann M, Karl M, Nkenke E, Schlegel A. Comparative study on interactive computer‐aided‐learning and computer‐aided‐testing in patient‐based dental training in maxillofacial surgery. Eur J Dent Educ 2008; 12: 35-40.
• Omar E. Perceptions of Teaching Methods for Preclinical Oral Surgery: A Comparison with Learning Styles. Open Dent J 2017; 11: 109-19. (doi: 10.2174/1874210601711010109). eCollection 2017.
• Rodriguez O, Sanchez-Ismayel A, Sanchez R, Pena R, Salamo O. Construct validity of an inanimate training model for laparoscopic appendectomy. JSLS 2013; 17: 445-9.
• Miki T, Iwai T, Kotani K, Dang J, Sawada H, Miyake M. Development of a virtual reality training system for endoscope-assisted submandibular gland removal. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2016; 44: 1800-5.
• DeMasi SC, Katsuta E, Takabe K. Live animals for preclinical medical student surgical training. Edorium J Surg 2016; 3: 24-31.
• Krähenbühl SM, Čvančara P, Stieglitz T, et al. Return of the cadaver: Key role of anatomic dissection for plastic surgery resident training. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017; 96: e7528. (doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007528).
• Reznick RK, MacRae H. Teaching surgical skills—changes in the wind. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2664-9.
• Evans AW. Assessing competence in surgical dentistry. Br Dent J 2001; 190: 343-6.
• Aspegren K. BEME Guide No. 2: Teaching and learning communication skills in medicine-a review with quality grading of articles. Medical Teach 1999; 21: 563-70.
• Evans BJ, Stanley RO, Burrows GD, Sweet B. Lectures and skills workshops as teaching formats in a history‐taking skills course for medical students. Med Educ 1989; 23; 364-70.