Clinical Experience Comparison of Foreign-Trained Dentists and Domestic Dental Students: One Institution's Experience.

This study compared the clinical experiences of foreign-trained dentists (FTDs) enrolled in an Advance Standing DMD Dental Program (DMDAS) with those of the domestic dental students (DMD) at the University of Illinois Chicago, College of Dentistry (UIC-COD). A cross-sectional retrospective chart review of patients treated by 295 DMD and 253 DMDAS predoctoral dental students was completed at the UIC-COD. The data were retrieved from the electronic health record system (axiUm) for the graduated classes of 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 on various performed clinical procedures as measured by relative value units (RVUs). The retrieved data were used to compare the clinical experiences of DMDAS vs. DMD students. Descriptive (mean) and statistical (independent t-test) analyses were used (α = 0.05). The results indicated that DMD and DMDAS students had comparable clinical experiences in several disciplines, including diagnosis, prevention, direct/indirect restorations, endodontics, periodontics, complete dentures, removable partial dentures, implants/fixed partial dentures, and oral surgery. There was a statistical difference in total RVUs for diagnosis (p = 0.002) and direct restorations (p < 0.001), in which DMD students had more experience. The 28 month program for FTDs appeared to be a reasonable timeframe to obtain an adequate number of varied clinical experiences as compared with the traditional four-year program at the UIC-COD.

Clinical Instructions for Using Silver Diamine Fluoride (SDF) in Dental Caries Management.

Manufacturer instructions for 38% silver diamine fluoride (SDF) are limited to current FDA clearance for tooth desensitization. There is a need for instructions to provide best-practice recommendations for off-label use of SDF for caries prevention and arrest. METHODS: The authors considered existing clinical approaches to the use of 38% SDF at pH 10 for the prevention and arrest of active dental caries, in light of the best current evidence. Application of SDF, with or without subsequent direct restoration, is included. The content was reviewed by stakeholders including but not limited to those listed on the consensus statement (Appendix A, below). RESULTS: 38% SDF for the prevention and arrest of active caries lesions, as well as compatibility with common direct restorative materials, such as glass-ionomer cement and resin composite, has a foundation in the scientific literature. A practical decision-flow diagram and accompanying best practices for treatment of caries lesions, based on clinical access and intention to restore, were developed based on available evidence and expert clinical observation when no evidence was available. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the best available evidence, a logical approach can be adopted regarding the practical use of 38% SDF for caries prevention and arrest. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: SDF used as per these instructions for prevention on high-risk tooth surfaces and arrest of active caries lesions has a place in the practitioner's dental caries management armamentarium. When SDF is applied to active lesions, it can be used with or without subsequent restoration, depending on clinical context, expert judgment, and patient input.