Recognising and supporting authentic learning in a changing world: the opportunities and threats of AI.

Since the term AI (artificial intelligence) was first coined, it has become embedded in modern life, with debate focusing on its challenges. In dentistry, AI is being used in clinical and education practice; however, many educators have limited knowledge or skills in its use. The British Alliance of Researchers in Dental Education and Scholarship hosted an AI-themed conference in November 2023. The conference organisers set out to initiate discussion on the use of AI in UK dental education, including a focused workshop to develop a consensus opinion. Before the conference, potential opportunities and threats associated with AI were determined, and through a pre-conference questionnaire, these were prioritised for in-depth discussion. During the workshop, personalised learning, support for learning, educator resources and equality were all identified as opportunities presented by AI, while digital literacy, misuse and safety were seen as potential threats. Two key overarching concepts emerged at the end of the conference: recognition that AI is here to stay and that dental schools must engage with it now to realise its potential; and recognition that educators do not know enough about how students are using AI and need to collaborate with our students in future development and research.

Evaluation of student-perceived competence of interprofessional working in Gerodontology.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pharmacy, dental and dental therapy undergraduate students' perceived competence of interprofessional working before and after attending an interprofessional education (IPE) Gerodontology workshop. BACKGROUND: Whilst there is international recognition of the importance of collaboration between the dental profession and systemic healthcare providers to enhance patient care, there remains a paucity of research into IPE in Gerodontology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pharmacy, dental and dental therapy undergraduate students attended a 2-hour Gerodontology case-based workshop. Students completed anonymised Interprofessional Collaborative Competencies Attainment Surveys (ICCAS) before and after attendance. RESULTS: 108 questionnaires were received, 7 were withdrawn (1 incomplete with only pre-workshop side completed, 6 did not identify degree programme). From 101 included questionnaires, 37 were from pharmacy, 56 dental and 8 dental therapy students resulting in response rates of 84%, 82% and 67%, respectively. Each student group recorded an increase in positive reflective competence median (IQR) after taking part in the workshop. Overall median (IQR) reflective competence before the workshop was 6 (1), 5 (2) and 6 (2) for pharmacy, dental and dental therapy students, respectively, which increased to 7 (1) for all groups. There was variability in reflective competence before attending the workshop between dental and pharmacy students for two questions, and dental and dental therapy students for two different questions. CONCLUSION: All students reported increased reflective competence of interprofessional working following the workshop. These findings suggest that introduction of IPE events into Gerodontology curricula may improve student understanding and appreciation of interprofessional working when providing care for older people.

An in-situ pilot study to investigate the native clinical resistance of enamel to erosion.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the differences in susceptibility of the surface of native and polished enamel to dietary erosion using an in-situ model. METHODS: Thirty healthy volunteers (n = 10 per group) wore mandibular appliances containing 2 native and 2 polished enamel samples for 30 min after which, the samples were exposed to either an ex-vivo or in-vivo immersion in orange juice for 5, 10 or 15 min and the cycle repeated twice with an hour's interval between them. Samples were scanned with a non-contacting laser profilometer and surface roughness was extracted from the data, together with step height and microhardness change on the polished enamel samples. RESULTS: All volunteers completed the study. For native enamel there were no statistical difference between baseline roughness values versus post erosion. Polished enamel significantly increased mean (SD) Sa roughness from baseline for each group resulting in roughness change of 0.04 (0.03), 0.06 (0.04), 0.04 (0.03), 0.06 (0.03), 0.08 (0.05) and 0.09 (0.05) µm respectively. With statistical differences between roughness change 45 min in-vivo versus 45 min ex-vivo (p < 0.05). Microhardness significantly decreased for each polished group, with statistical differences in hardness change between 30 min in-vivo versus 30 min ex-vivo (p < 0.05), 45 min in-vivo versus 30 min ex-vivo (p < 0.01), 45 min in-vivo versus 45 min ex-vivo (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The native resistance to erosion provided clinically is a combination of the ultrastructure of outer enamel, protection from the salivary pellicle and the overall effects of the oral environment. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03178968. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study demonstrates that outer enamel is innately more resistant to erosion which is clinically relevant as once there has been structural breakdown at this level the effects of erosive wear will be accelerated.

Measurement of surface roughness changes of unpolished and polished enamel following erosion.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if Sa roughness data from measuring one central location of unpolished and polished enamel were representative of the overall surfaces before and after erosion. METHODS: Twenty human enamel sections (4x4 mm) were embedded in bis-acryl composite and randomised to either a native or polishing enamel preparation protocol. Enamel samples were subjected to an acid challenge (15 minutes 100 mL orange juice, pH 3.2, titratable acidity 41.3mmol OH/L, 62.5 rpm agitation, repeated for three cycles). Median (IQR) surface roughness [Sa] was measured at baseline and after erosion from both a centralised cluster and four peripheral clusters. Within each cluster, five smaller areas (0.04 mm2) provided the Sa roughness data. RESULTS: For both unpolished and polished enamel samples there were no significant differences between measuring one central cluster or four peripheral clusters, before and after erosion. For unpolished enamel the single central cluster had a median (IQR) Sa roughness of 1.45 (2.58) µm and the four peripheral clusters had a median (IQR) of 1.32 (4.86) µm before erosion; after erosion there were statistically significant reductions to 0.38 (0.35) µm and 0.34 (0.49) µm respectively (p<0.0001). Polished enamel had a median (IQR) Sa roughness 0.04 (0.17) µm for the single central cluster and 0.05 (0.15) µm for the four peripheral clusters which statistically significantly increased after erosion to 0.27 (0.08) µm for both (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Measuring one central cluster of unpolished and polished enamel was representative of the overall enamel surface roughness, before and after erosion.