Dental teacher feedback and student learning: a qualitative study

Introduction: Feedback is essential to improve student learning and motivation and to encourage curriculum development by teachers. This study looked at feedback to and from dental students from a qualitative perspective. Methods: Dental teachers were recruited exclusively to this study from the membership of the Association for Dental Education in Europe (ADEE). Delegates from each of the four annual ADEE conferences were invited to attend focus groups to discuss aspects of feedback. Focus groups established an individual theme for the respective conferences: (i) the role of the teacher in delivering feedback; (ii) feedback from the students' perspective; (iii) changes to feedback due to the COVID-19 pandemic; and (iv) integrating feedback with assessments. Results: Qualitative data collected from the conference delegates were diverse and thought provoking. Delegates reported different styles of feedback varying from individual, personal feedback to no feedback at all. An enforced and mostly positive adaptation to online delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic was reported. A partial return to pre-pandemic practices was described. Conclusions: Feedback is well recognized by students and teachers as contributing to learning. A universal approach to delivering feedback as part of the student learning process can be challenging due to a multitude of variables. Many aspects of changes in dental education, teaching, and feedback practices adopted as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic have been retained post-pandemic, thereby accelerating the anticipated progression to online teaching</p

Assessing dentists’ awareness of the orthodontic–restorative interface

Objectives: Awareness of the interface between restorative and orthodontic treatments is essential for dentists to facilitate a meaningful interdisciplinary approach by integrating the knowledge and skills of different dental disciplines into patients' treatment to enhance outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate General Dental Practitioners' (GDPs) awareness of the orthodontic-restorative interface. Methods: This was a mixed-method study involving the collection of a) quantitative data via a bespoke online questionnaire and b) qualitative data through open questions. A weblink was created to the questionnaire using Opinio®. The questionnaire was distributed to GDPs practising in the UK. Clinical vignette-based questions assessed GDPs awareness and the results were categorised into two groups: aware and unaware. Two months after the primary survey, respondents were sent an email with follow-up (reliability) survey. Reliability responses were compared against the primary responses to assess the repeatability using intraclass correlation coefficient. Data were analysed using independent t-test and X2 test. Results: 118 complete responses were received. 63 GDPs (53.4 % [95 % CI 44 %-63 %]) demonstrated a good understanding of the orthodontic-restorative interface. These GDPs were characterised by greater age (t = 2.75, p = 0.007) and experience (t = 3.54, p Conclusions: Orthodontic-restorative treatment aids in minimal invasive dentistry. GDPs lack adequate awareness of the orthodontic-restorative interface in relation to patient care and communication with patients. More quality and structured undergraduate and postgraduate training are imperative to facilitate GDPs to understand and utilise aspects of orthodontic-restorative treatments to raise the standard of patient care. Additionally, to support these patients, the educational pathway between GDPs and specialist orthodontists is crucial. Clinical significance: GDPs ability to assess and carry out orthodontic-restorative treatments would conserve natural teeth. Dependable access to orthodontic services would encourage GDPs to refer challenging cases to specialists or dentists with enhanced skills. When the circumstances call for it, patients should be given orthodontic-restorative alternatives, regardless of the potential consequences of their acceptance of the procedures</p

Longevity of anterior composite restorations for localized tooth wear: a scoping review

(1) Objective: This scoping review evaluates composite restorations as a treatment modality for anterior tooth surface loss and investigates the longevity of the direct and indirect composites used herein. (2) Method: The search encompassed Medline, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and hand search utilizing the PICO framework. (3) Results: Eight studies were included in this review, comprising one randomized controlled trial, one retrospective, and six prospective studies. Some studies reported favorable outcomes for composite restorations in anterior teeth. Although not statistically significant, evidence supported the anterior composite as a viable short- to medium-term solution for managing tooth wear. Direct resin composites were deemed clinically and cost-effective when managing localized anterior tooth wear. However, limitations and inconsistencies in this scoping review limited definitive clinical recommendations. (4) Conclusions: Further research, including well-managed randomized controlled trials using standardized protocols and longer follow-up periods, is essential to reconfirm the long-term efficacies of anterior composite restorations when managing tooth wear. A robust research design and exacting protocols could facilitate more meaningful clinical conclusions.</p