Mezuniyet öncesi öğrencilerin protetik dişhekimliğindeki tecrübe ve özgüvenleri

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye'deki bir dişhekimliği fakültesinde son sınıf öğrencilerinin protetik diş tedavisindeki tecrübe ve özgüvenlerini değerlendirmektir.Gereç ve yöntem: Öğrencilerin protetik prosedürlerdeki klinik becerilerini sorgulayan bir anket formu oluşturuldu (n:44). 20 soru çoktan seçmeli, 1 soru açık uçlu ve 3 soru Likert tipi skala içerecek şekilde toplamda 24 soruluk formlar öğrencilere dağıtıldı. Sonuçlar istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Öğrencilerin %40'ı protetik diş tedavisinin dişhekimliğinin en zor alanı olduğunu bildirdi. Öğrenciler kendilerini en çok, diş kesimi (2,89), post ölçüsü alma (2,84), tam protezlerde oklüzal dikey boyut belirleme (2,36), parsiyel protezlerde oklüzal dikey boyut belirleme (2,21), tam protezlerde kenar şekillendirme (2,50) ve parsiyel protezlerde kenar şekillendirme (2,32) sırasında güvensiz hissettiklerini bildirdi.Sonuç: Protetik diş tedavisi ders müfredatında, öğrencilerin kendilerini yetersiz hissettikleri konular daha fazla vurgulanmalıdır.

Undergraduate students' experience and self-assessed confidence in prosthetic dentistry

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the final year students' experience and confidence in prosthetic dentistry within a dental school in Turkey.Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was prepared to assess the students' experience of clinical skills in prosthetic procedures (n:44). Twenty questions were multiple-choice;1 question was open-ended and 3 questions used a Likerttype scale ranging from 1 (very little confident) to 5 (very confident). The data were statistically analyzed.Results: Forty percent of the students thought that prosthodontics was the most difficult field in dentistry. Students rated themselves as being least confident in tooth preparation (2.89), making impression for post-core (2.84), determination of occlusal vertical dimension for complete (2.36) and removable partial dentures (2.21), followed by peripheral sealing for complete (2.50) and removable partial dentures (2.32).Conclusions: There are lots of subjects in which the students reported a lack of confidence that warrants greater emphasis in the undergraduate prosthodontic curriculum.

PDF

___

1. Douglass CW, Watson AJ. Future needs for fixed and removable partial dentures in the United States: J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:9-14.
2. Goodacre CJ. Predoctoral fixed prosthodontics education. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:319-25.
3. Lang BR. A review of traditional therapies in complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72(5):538-42.
4. Lang LA, Holmes DC, Passon C, Trombly RM, Astroth JD, Tavel AF. Introducing dental students to clinical pa¬tient care: the complete denture prosthodontics transition clinic. J Prosthodont 2003;12:206-10.
5. Divaris K, Barlow PJ, Chendea SA, Cheong WS, Dounis A, Dragan IF, Hamlin J, Hosseinzadeh L, Kuin D, Mitrirattanakul S, Mo'nes M, Molnar N, Perryer G, Pickup J, Raval N, Shanahan D, Songpaisan Y, Taneva E, Yaghoub-Zadeh S, West K, Vrazic D. The academic environment: the students' perspective. Eur J Dent Educ 2008;12 Suppl 1:120-30.
6. Valachovic RW. Making science clinically relevant. J Dent Educ 1997;61:434-6.
7. Gerzina TM,McLeanT, Fairley J. Dental clinicalteaching: perceptions of students and teachers. J Dent Educ 2005;69:1377-84.
8. Manakil J, George R. Self-perceived work preparedness of the graduating dental students. Eur J Dent Educ 2013;17(2):101-5.
9. Shetty VB, Shirahatti RV, Pawar P. Students' perceptions of their education on graduation from a dental school in India. J Dent Educ 2012;76:1520-6.
10. Henzi D, Davis E, Jasinevicius R, Hendricson W. In the students' own words: what are the strengths and weaknesses of the dental school curriculum? J Dent Educ 2007;71:632-45.
11. Nicolas E, Baptiste M, Roger-Leroi V. Clermont-Ferrand dental school curriculum: an appraisal by last-year students and graduates. Eur J Dent Educ 2009;13:93-9.
12. Polychronopoulou A, Divaris K. Perceived sources of stress among Greek dental students. J Dent Educ 2005;69:687-92.
13. Cardall WR, Rowan RC, Bay C. Dental education from the students' perspective: curriculum and climate. J Dent Educ 2008;72:600-9.
14. Honey J, Lynch CD, Burke FM, Gilmour AS. Ready for practice? A study of confidence levels of final year dental students at Cardiff University and University College Cork. Eur J Dent Educ 2011;15:98-103.
15. Yiu CK, McGrath C, Bridges S, Corbet EF, Botelho MG, Dyson JE, Chan LK. Self-perceived preparedness for dental practice amongst graduates of The University of Hong Kong's integrated PBL dental curriculum. Eur J Dent Educ 2012;16:e96-e105.
16. McGivney GP. Advanced education in prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:334-41. 17. Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Simplified complete dentures. Dent Clin North Am 2004;48:625-40.
18. Haug SP, Brown DT, Goodacre CJ, Cerimele BJ. Recent graduates' and current dental students' evaluation of their prosthodontic curriculum. J Prosthet Dent 1993;70:361-71.
19. Dikbas I, Ozkurt Z, Kazazoglu E. Predoctoral prosthodontic curricula on removable partial dentures: survey of Turkish dental schools. J Dent Educ 2013;77:85-92.
20. Curtis DA, Lind SL, Dellinges M, Setia G, Finzen FC. Dental students' self-assessment of preclinical examinations. J Dent Educ 2008;72:265-77.
21. Panek H, Krawczykowska H, Dobosz A, Napadlek P, Panek BA, Sosna-Gramza M. Follow-up visits as a measure of adaptation process to removable prostheses. Gerodontology 2006;23:87-92.
22. Salinas TJ.Treatment of edentulism: optimizing outcomes with tissue management and impression techniques. J Prosthodont 2009;18:97-105.
23. Beresin VE, Schiesser FJ. The neutral zone in complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 2006;95(2):93-100.
24. Ivanhoe JR, Cibirka RM, Parr GR.Treating the modern complete denture patient: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:631-5.
25. Quirino MR, Birman EG, Paula CR. Oral manifestations of diabetes mellitus in controlled and uncontrolled patients. Braz Dent J 1995;6:131-6.
26. Sakar O, Beyli M, Marsan G. Combined prosthodontic and orthodontic treatment of a patient with a Class III skeletal malocclusion: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92: 224-8.
27. Mays KA. Reestablishing occlusal vertical dimension using a diagnostic treatment prosthesis in the edentulous patient: a clinical report. J Prosthodont 2003;12:30-6.
28. Ozkurt Z, Dikbas I, Kazazoglu E. Predoctoral prosthodontic curriculum for complete dentures: survey in Turkish dental schools. J Dent Educ 2013;77:93-8.
29. Goodacre CJ. Designing tooth preparations for optimal success. Dent Clin N Am 2004;48: 359-85.
30. Pitigoi-Aron G, Streacker AB, Schulze KA, Geissberger M. Accuracy of cast posts and cores using a new investigative method. Gen Dent 2012;60:e153-7.