ABSTRACT
Methods: Ninety-six dental students each prepared tooth #36 for an all-ceramic crown on typodont models and were then randomly assigned into either group A: performed digital scan first, or Group B: performed conventional impression first. Procedure time was recorded for both. Immediately following each procedure, students indicated their perceived procedure difficulty. After exposure to both techniques, they selected their preferred one. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the mean procedure time of both techniques (P < 0.0001), where students spent 663.76 ± 442.50 seconds to complete the conventional impression and 293.32 ± 181.49 seconds to complete the digital scan. Females were significantly faster in completing the conventional impression compared to males. On the contrary, male students were faster in digital scanning than female students. There were no carryover effects in the duration and the initially performed procedure. 76% (73 of 96) of participants preferred digital scanning with no statistical significance shown between the preferred and initially performed procedure. Participants perceived conventional impressions to be more difficult than digital scans. There was a weak positive correlation between the VAS score and the procedure time for the digital technique (R = 0.25) and a moderate positive correlation for the conventional technique (R = 0.45). Conclusions: The digital technique was preferred and perceived as easier than the conventional among undergraduate dental students with no impression-making experience, suggesting their readiness for new technology uptake. However, no significant correlation was found between the initially performed procedure and preference.
ABSTRACT
Objective: The primary objective of this cross-sectional national study was to investigate the status of digital dental technology (DDT) adoption in Saudi Arabian undergraduate dental education. A secondary objective was to explore the impact of dental schools' funding sources to incorporate digital technologies. Methods: A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to the chairpersons of prosthetic sciences departments of the 27 dental schools in Saudi Arabia. If any department chairman failed to respond to the survey, a designated full-time faculty member was contacted to fill out the form. The participants were asked about the school's sector, DDT implementation in the curriculum, implemented level, their perceptions of the facilitators and challenges for incorporating DDT. Results: Of the 27 dental schools (18 public and 8 private), 26 responded to the questionnaire (response rate: 96.3%). The geographic distribution of the respondent schools was as follows: 12 schools in the central region, 6 in the western region, and 8 in other regions. Seventeen schools secure and preserve patients' records using electronic software, whereas nine schools use paper charts. Seventeen schools (64,4%) implemented DDT in their curricula. The schools that did not incorporate DDT into their undergraduate curricula were due to not being included in the curriculum (78%), lack of expertise (66%), untrained faculty and staff (44%), and cost (33%). Conclusions: This national study showed that digital components still need to be integrated into Saudi Arabian dental schools' curricula and patient care treatment. Additionally, there was no association between funding sources and the DDT implementation into the current curricula. Consequently, Saudi dental schools must emphasize the implementation and utilization of DDT to align with Saudi Vision 2030 for healthcare digitization and to graduate competent dentists in digital dental care.
