Evaluation of an individual anamnesis tool for teaching risk-oriented prevention - a pilot study in undergraduate dental students.
Dental education
Medical history
Risk classification
Risk management
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Aug 2022
29 Aug 2022
Historique:
received:
30
08
2021
accepted:
24
08
2022
entrez:
29
8
2022
pubmed:
30
8
2022
medline:
1
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
A comprehensive medical history is needed to establish and ensure a high standard in dental care; however, it is challenging to draw clinical consequences on the variety of potential diseases and medications, especially for dental students. Aim of this observational study was to investigate, whether undergraduate dental students using an analog anamnesis tool for risk classification would be more confident and have more knowledge in risk classification than other students in the same year of study. A cohort of 48 fifth year dental students was included and allocated into two groups based on their curriculum-related division (group A: n = 25, group B: n = 23). Group A received a teaching event and provision of an analog anamnesis tool for risk classification; group B received neither a teaching event nor the anamnesis tool. At baseline and after two weeks (follow-up), questionnaires regarding self-perceived confidence with risk classification, questions on different disease, medications and lifestyle factors and a task with 15 medical histories of prepared patient cases were applied. The data was statistically analyzed using Mann-Whitney or Wilcoxon test. In group comparison of the differences between baseline and follow-up regarding self-perceived confidence, significantly higher improvement was noted in group A compared to group B for all questions (p < 0.05). With regard to knowledge, the group comparison revealed that the differences in all of the four tasks were significantly higher in group A compared to group B (pi ≤ 0.01). Thereby, the different tasks in group A differed between baseline and follow-up as follows: Risk of complications: 49.04 ± 13.59 vs. 67.96 ± 17.22, p < 0.01, Risk of oral diseases: 48.77 ± 13.57 vs. 63.44 ± 16.78, p = 0.01, Indication of antibiotic prophylaxis: 75.70 ± 13.45 vs. 87.97 ± 10.37, p < 0.01 and the Medical history task on 15 patient cases: 58.45 ± 4.74 vs. 71.47 ± 9.54, p < 0.01. The applied analog anamnesis tool supported an increase in students´ confidence with issues related to at-risk patients alongside with their knowledge in risk classification. The applied anamnesis tool can be recommended for improving teaching of risk management for undergraduate dental students.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
A comprehensive medical history is needed to establish and ensure a high standard in dental care; however, it is challenging to draw clinical consequences on the variety of potential diseases and medications, especially for dental students. Aim of this observational study was to investigate, whether undergraduate dental students using an analog anamnesis tool for risk classification would be more confident and have more knowledge in risk classification than other students in the same year of study.
METHODS
METHODS
A cohort of 48 fifth year dental students was included and allocated into two groups based on their curriculum-related division (group A: n = 25, group B: n = 23). Group A received a teaching event and provision of an analog anamnesis tool for risk classification; group B received neither a teaching event nor the anamnesis tool. At baseline and after two weeks (follow-up), questionnaires regarding self-perceived confidence with risk classification, questions on different disease, medications and lifestyle factors and a task with 15 medical histories of prepared patient cases were applied. The data was statistically analyzed using Mann-Whitney or Wilcoxon test.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In group comparison of the differences between baseline and follow-up regarding self-perceived confidence, significantly higher improvement was noted in group A compared to group B for all questions (p < 0.05). With regard to knowledge, the group comparison revealed that the differences in all of the four tasks were significantly higher in group A compared to group B (pi ≤ 0.01). Thereby, the different tasks in group A differed between baseline and follow-up as follows: Risk of complications: 49.04 ± 13.59 vs. 67.96 ± 17.22, p < 0.01, Risk of oral diseases: 48.77 ± 13.57 vs. 63.44 ± 16.78, p = 0.01, Indication of antibiotic prophylaxis: 75.70 ± 13.45 vs. 87.97 ± 10.37, p < 0.01 and the Medical history task on 15 patient cases: 58.45 ± 4.74 vs. 71.47 ± 9.54, p < 0.01.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The applied analog anamnesis tool supported an increase in students´ confidence with issues related to at-risk patients alongside with their knowledge in risk classification. The applied anamnesis tool can be recommended for improving teaching of risk management for undergraduate dental students.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36038867
doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03710-2
pii: 10.1186/s12909-022-03710-2
pmc: PMC9426018
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
648Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Jun;45 Suppl 20:S162-S170
pubmed: 29926490
Circulation. 2007 Oct 9;116(15):1736-54
pubmed: 17446442
Open Dent J. 2015 Jun 22;9:176-80
pubmed: 26140064
Diabetes Care. 2018 Mar;41(3):513-521
pubmed: 29330152
J Can Dent Assoc. 2015;81:f10
pubmed: 26214832
Eur J Dent Educ. 2018 Feb;22(1):9-14
pubmed: 27393706
Oral Health Prev Dent. 2014;12(4):305-11
pubmed: 24914430
J Dent Educ. 2014 Sep;78(9):1244-51
pubmed: 25179920
J Can Dent Assoc. 2020 Dec;86:k17
pubmed: 33326372
BMC Med Educ. 2011 Sep 23;11:67
pubmed: 21943239
Curr Oral Health Rep. 2017;4(1):1-7
pubmed: 28303212
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Feb;75(2):240-244
pubmed: 27865802
J Dent Res. 2013 May;92(5):399-408
pubmed: 23525531
Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2011 Jun 28;7(12):738-48
pubmed: 21709707
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1994 Jan;77(1):105-9
pubmed: 8108087
Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2017 Oct;13(10):606-620
pubmed: 28835673
Eur J Dent Educ. 2006 May;10(2):96-102
pubmed: 16634817
Gen Dent. 2012 May-Jun;60(3):200-7; quiz 208-9
pubmed: 22623459
Int Dent J. 2017 Sep;67 Suppl 2:14-18
pubmed: 29023744
BMC Med Educ. 2020 Sep 11;20(1):298
pubmed: 32917184
J Dent Educ. 2012 Apr;76(4):495-500
pubmed: 22473562
J Dent Educ. 2015 Sep;79(9):1016-23
pubmed: 26329025
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 06;10:CD012432
pubmed: 28983908
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Jun 22;18(1):149
pubmed: 29929497
J Dent Educ. 2009 Dec;73(12):1408-14
pubmed: 20007497
J Dent Educ. 2016 Jan;80(1):65-72
pubmed: 26729686
Eur J Dent Educ. 2016 Aug;20(3):180-8
pubmed: 26118405
Adv Prev Med. 2020 May 20;2020:6752342
pubmed: 32518697