Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to tooth morphology among dental students and dental technician students

Gonca Deste Gökay; Perihan Oyar

doi:10.7126/cumudj.1464452

EN

Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to tooth morphology among dental students and dental technician students

Abstract

Objectives: Students are introduced to the morphological features of primary and permanent human dentition in a dental anatomy course, which is a part of the basic core sciences program in the Department of Dentistry and Dental Prosthesis Technology. The purpose of this study was to compare dental students' (DSs’) and dental technician students' (DTSs’) knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to dental morphology. Materials and Methods: Using a 26-item self-administered questionnaire, the DSs and DTSs participated in a descriptive cross-sectional study. Three components made up the questionnaire: four items for demographic profile, ten items for dental morphology knowledge level, seven items for attitude toward tooth morphology, and five items for practice in tooth morphology. There were 274 student answers in all. The data were analyzed using an independent t test and one-way ANOVA. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance for each test. Results: Between DSs and DTSs, there was a statistically significant difference in their knowledge and practices of tooth morphology (p< .001). However, DTSs knowledge of dental morphology was significantly greater, and DSs practice scores were significantly greater. There was no significant difference in the attitude of tooth morphology between the two groups (p=0.379). Both groups had low levels of dental morphology knowledge, with an average of 3.86 correct answers for DTSs and an average of 3.16 correct answers for DSs. In the DSs group, first-year students had a greater knowledge level (4.22±1.63 correct answers) than did the other students. Conclusions: Knowing the variations in dental morphology knowledge, attitudes, and practices between a dentist and dental technician may help us take preventative measures. While preclinical dentistry students and dental technician students had different levels of expertise, both groups were less knowledgeable about tooth morphology. Both groups had similarly high attitudes toward tooth morphology.

Keywords

Ethical Statement

The study was approved by the Health Sciences Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Bursa Uludağ University, Bursa, Türkiye (reference number: 2024-03-27/2024-03).

Thanks

The authors would like to thank all the dental students and dental technician students for their participation in this study.

References

1. McHanwell S. Teaching anatomical sciences to dental students. In: Chan LK, Pawlina W (Editors). Teaching Anatomy: A Practical Guide. 1st Ed. New York, NY: Springer International Publishing 2015. p. 353–361.
2. Rubinstein S, Nidetz A. The art and science of the direct posterior restoration: Recreating form, color, and translucency. Alpha Omegan 2007;100:30–35.
3. de Azevedo RA, da Rosa WL, da Silva AF, Correa MB, Torriani MA, Lund RG. Comparative effectiveness of dental anatomy carving pedagogy: A systematic review. J Dent Educ 2015; 79:914–921.
4. Patil S, Sowmya SV, Rao RS, Raj T. Knowledge, attitude and practice of tooth morphology among dental students. J Adv Clin Res Insights 2015;2:124-130.
5. Bakr MM, Thompson CM, Massadiq M. Anatomical sciences: A foundation for a solid learning experience in dental technology and dental prosthetics. Anat Sci Educ 2017;10:395–404.
6. Magne P. A new approach to the learning of dental morphology, function, and esthetics: The “2D-3D-4D” concept. Int J Esthet Dent 2015;10:32–47.
7. Erdemir U, Yucel T, Yildiz E, Cakan DG, Sayinsu K. Dental analysis. In: Erdemir U, Yildiz E (Editors). Esthetic and Functional Management of Diastema: A Multidisciplinary Approach. 1st Ed. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. 2016. p. 101–120.
8. Culp T, Culp L. Communicating with dental laboratories. In: Weinstein GM, Zientz MT (Editors). The Dental Reference Manual: A Daily Guide for Students and Practitioners. 1st Ed. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. 2017. p. 409–426.

9. Conte DB, Zancanaro M, Guollo A, Schneider LR, Lund RG, Rodrigues-Junior SA. Educational interventions to improve dental anatomy carving ability of dental students: A systematic review. Anat Sci Educ 2021;14:99–109.
10. Elgreatly A, Mahrous A. Enhancing student learning in dental anatomy by using virtual three-dimensional models. J Prosthodont 2020;29:269–271.
11. Leisnert L, Karlsson M, Franklin I, Lindh L, Wretlind K. Improving teamwork between students from two professional programmes in dental education. J Dent Educ 2012;16:17–26.
12. Lone M, McKenna JP, Cryan JF, Downer EJ, Toulouse A. A Survey of tooth morphology teaching methods employed in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Eur J Dent Educ 2018;22:e438–e443.
13. Wang H, Xu H, Zhang J, Yu S, Wang M, Qiu J, et al. The effect of 3D-printed plastic teeth on scores in a tooth morphology course in a Chinese university. BMC Med Educ 2020;20:469.
14. Cantín M, Muñoz M, Olate S. Generation of 3D tooth models based on three-dimensional scanning to study the morphology of permanent teeth. Int J Morphol 2015;33:782‐787.
15. Abu Eid R, Ewan K, Foley J, Oweis Y, Jayasinghe J. Self directed study and carving tooth models for learning tooth morphology: Perceptions of students at the University of Aberdeen, Scotland. J Dent Educ 2013;77:1147-1153.
16. Magne P. A new approach to the learning of dental morphology, function, and esthetics: The “2D-3D-4D” concept. Int J Esthet Dent 2015;10:32–47.
17. Okeson J, Buckman J. Section on Dental Anatomy and Occlusion, American Association of Dental Schools. Curriculum guidelines for dental anatomy. J Dent Educ 1993;57:382–383.
18. de Azevedo RA, Torriani MA, Correa MB, Lund RG. Optimizing quality of dental carving by preclinical dental students through anatomy theory reinforcement. Anat Sci Educ 2018;11:377–384.
19. Alzahrani AA, Alhassan EM, Attia MA, Albanghali MA. Enhancing dental carving skills of preclinical dental hygiene students using online dental anatomy resources. Open Dent J 2019;13:499–504.
20. Zafar S, Zachar JJ. Evaluation of holohuman augmented reality application as a novel educational tool in dentistry. Eur J Dent Educ 2020;24:259–265.
21. Darda DM. Observations by a university anatomy teacher and a suggestion for curricular change: Integrative anatomy for undergraduates. Anat Sci Educ 2010;3:73–76.
22. Al-Asmar AA, Al-Nsour M, Alsoleihat F. Is there a correlation between students’ performance in dental anatomy and performance in operative dentistry? Int J Morphol 2019;37:93-97.
23. Singh D, Pandey P, Kudva S, Singh MK, Chandra S. Perception of dental students about tooth carving in dental education at a tertiary level health care facility. Medico Legal Update 2020;20:1493-1499.
24. Oweis Y, Eriefej N, Eid RA. Students’ perceptions of dental anatomy course at the University of Jordan. Jordan Med J 2015;49:147-154.
25. Mandalaywala D, Pillai JP, Monpara P, Gadhavi T. Perception of dental anatomy among dental students, dental practitioners, and dental academicians: A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. J Acad Dent Educ 2022;8:9-14.
26. Sierpinska T, Kropiwnicka A, Kuc J, Jacunski P, Gołębiewska M. The influence of occlusal morphology on occlusion time. Cranio 2017;35:101-109.
27. Kamijo S, Sugimoto K, Oki M, Tsuchida Y, Suzuki T. Trends in domiciliary dental care including the need for oral appliances and dental technicians in Japan. J Oral Sci 2018;60:626-633.
28. Davenport JC, Basker RM, Heath JR, Ralph JP, Glantz PO, Hammond P. Communication between the dentist and the dental technician. Br Dent J 2000;189:471-474.
29. Gupta S, Agnihotri A, Chandra A, Gupta OP. Contemporary practice in forensic odontology. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 2014;18:244-250.
30. Takeuchi Y, Koizumi H, Imai H, Furuchi M, Takatsu M, Shimoe S. Education and licensure of dental technicians. J Oral Sci 2022;64:310-314.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Prosthodontics

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Gonca Deste Gökay ^*
0000-0002-5481-0063
Türkiye

Perihan Oyar
0000-0003-3849-9153
Türkiye

Publication Date

September 30, 2024

Submission Date

April 24, 2024

Acceptance Date

August 14, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2024 Volume: 27 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7126/cumudj.1464452

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA77SK95JB

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Deste Gökay G, Oyar P (September 1, 2024) Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to tooth morphology among dental students and dental technician students. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 27 3 166–172.

Öz

Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to tooth morphology among dental students and dental technician students

Abstract

Keywords

Ethical Statement

Thanks

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite