The Experts below are selected from a list of 297 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Robert F Wright - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
dental students perceptions of and experiences with Prosthodontics ten graduating classes at one institution
Journal of Dental Education, 2015Co-Authors: Jane H Shin, Taru Kinnunen, Marisa Zarchy, John D Da Silva, Brian Myung W Chang, Robert F WrightAbstract:It is important for members of the dental specialties to understand what motivates students to enter the specialty in order to ensure its continuing development and ability to meet patient needs. The aim of this study was to compare ten graduating classes at Harvard School of Dental Medicine (HSDM) regarding students' experiences with and perceptions of Prosthodontics and factors influencing those interested in pursuing Prosthodontics as a specialty . In 2013, HSDM students in the classes of 2012- 16 were surveyed, achieving a response rate of 81%. Survey questions sought information regarding specialty choice, factors influencing the choice, student experiences with Prosthodontics, and student perceptions of the dental disciplines. Responses were compared to those from a prior study of the HSDM classes of 2007-11. The responses showed a decrease in negative student experiences with Prosthodontics. The students regarded Prosthodontics highly for its impact on patient quality of life; however, students interested in pursuing Prosthodontics as a specialty decreased. All students said provider enjoyment was most impor- tant in choice of specialty. Cost of program, patient type, and program location were factors that especially influenced students interested in Prosthodontics. The improved student experiences with and perspectives on Prosthodontics may be a result of a curriculum change that led to more Prosthodontics procedures and case completions by students. The fall in students interested in Prosthodontics may have resulted from prosthodontic faculty transitions that occurred when the survey was conducted, as well as large debt burdens in spite of the fact that prosthodontists' earnings are among the highest in dentistry. Faculty must educate and mentor students about the realities of the profession, provide positive learning experiences in the field, and encourage students who enjoy Prosthodontics to pursue specialty training.
-
predoctoral dental students perceptions and experiences with Prosthodontics
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2013Co-Authors: Matilda Dhima, Vicki C Petropoulos, Thomas J Salinas, Robert F WrightAbstract:PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to: (1) investigate the perceptions and experiences of predoctoral dental students and advanced standing students on mentorship, exposure to Prosthodontics, and future need for the specialty, and (2) establish a baseline of students' perceptions of the impact of Prosthodontics on salary, personal and patient quality of life, and the profession of dentistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was distributed to 494 predoctoral and advanced standing students at the University of Pennsylvania School of Dental Medicine. Questions focused on the perceptions and experiences with the specialty of Prosthodontics. A total of 410 surveys were analyzed using Chi Square tests and univariate and multivariate analysis with statistical software. RESULTS: Response rate was 83%. A positive initial introduction to Prosthodontics was reported by 57% of students. Most students had positive experiences with prosthodontic faculty and enjoyed laboratory work and challenging/complex dentistry. A greater need for prosthodontists in the future was perceived by 82% of respondents, with 63% reporting that the future of Prosthodontics had been emphasized. Students reported (1) a preclinical course directed by prosthodontists and (2) working in the clinic with prosthodontic faculty (p < 0.006) as having the biggest impact on their introduction to Prosthodontics. A desire to pursue training or a career in Prosthodontics was reported by 3.4% of the respondents, with 1.7% of them pursuing Prosthodontics. Enjoyment of providing care in Prosthodontics was the most important factor for those who decided to pursue prosthodontic postgraduate training. When compared to other specialties, Prosthodontics ranked low with regards to its impact on salary (7(th) ), personal quality of life (5(th) ), patient quality of life (4(th) ), and strengthening of the dental field (7(th) ). CONCLUSION: Reasons few students are interested in Prosthodontics as a career, despite a positive first introduction and high perceived future need for prosthodontists may be attributed to a number of factors. These include insufficient prosthodontically, trained faculty, lack of a mentorship program, lack of an advanced graduate program, a perception of feeling unprepared upon graduation, and misconception of potential income in Prosthodontics.
-
a 10 year survey of us deans trends challenges and mentoring in Prosthodontics part 2
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2012Co-Authors: Brian M Chang, Bruce R Donoff, Taru Kinnunen, Deborah M Munoz, Robert F WrightAbstract:Purpose: Part 2 of this survey reports on the 2009 survey findings distributed to the deans of US dental schools. A national, electronic survey of 58 dental school deans was distributed by e-mail to evaluate an interest in specialty training, an interest in specialty training in Prosthodontics, faculty shortage issues, predoctoral curriculum in Prosthodontics, ideology regarding dental specialties, and the administrative position of Prosthodontics within the schools. Materials and Methods: The survey data were transferred to an online spreadsheet program for statistical analysis (Key Survey, Inc. http://www.keysurvey.com, Braintree, MA). The opinions of dental school deans were viewed as legitimate indicators of change within predoctoral and postdoctoral prosthodontic education. Statistical analysis was carried out using Statistica Version 9.1 (Statsoft, Tulsa, OK). Results: Of the 58 deans, 42 deans responded, for a 72.4% response rate. Twenty-three deans reported an increase in the number of students seeking specialty training after dental school. Only three deans reported a decrease in those seeking specialty training. In the 2009 survey, 45% the deans responded that there was an increased interest in Prosthodontics. One or more open faculty positions in Prosthodontics existed at 24 (59%) of the dental schools, and 30 (71%) offered at least one incentive or a variety of incentives to recruit faculty. The 2009 respondents to the deans’ survey revealed predoctoral student exposure to prosthodontists was high, and exposure to advanced education in Prosthodontics students was low. A survey of internal school programs that might have an impact on an increased interest in Prosthodontics revealed the presence of a predoctoral mentoring program for Prosthodontics in 36 (88%) of the institutions. The clinical curriculum included treatment of a variety of cases including complex cases as defined by a diagnostic classification system. The 2009 survey respondents reported an increase in the number of schools where Prosthodontics is a separate entity or department. Conclusion: Deans reported an increased interest in Prosthodontics in the 2009 survey. Open faculty positions in Prosthodontics existed in the majority of dental schools, and most schools offered incentives to recruit faculty. The survey of deans found a very high level of exposure of dental students to full-time prosthodontists and a very low exposure level to students enrolled in advanced education in Prosthodontics. The establishment of mentoring programs in Prosthodontics was reported by most deans, and the predoctoral curriculum included treating complex cases. Most deans stated that dual-specialty training in Prosthodontics and periodontics would be beneficial. The 2009 survey reported an increase in the number of departments of Prosthodontics in US schools.
-
a survey of deans trends challenges and mentoring in Prosthodontics part 2
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2008Co-Authors: Robert F Wright, Ryan A Dunlop, Hanspeter Weber, Bruce R DonoffAbstract:Purpose: This study consists of two parts. Part 1, a survey of program directors, was conducted to examine current trends in advanced education in Prosthodontics in the United States. Part 2 reports on the findings of a survey distributed to the deans of US dental schools to evaluate their observations of trends in prosthodontic education. Materials and Methods: A national, electronic survey of 55 dental school deans was distributed by e-mail to evaluate an interest in specialty training, an interest in specialization in Prosthodontics, faculty shortages, programs to address faculty shortages, predoctoral curriculum in Prosthodontics, opinions regarding dental specialties, and the administrative position of Prosthodontics within the schools. Results: Of the 55 deans, 44 deans responded, an 80% response rate. Only five deans reported a decrease in the number of students seeking specialty training after dental school. The remaining 39 deans reported a large increase, slight increase, or no change in those seeking specialty training. In 29.6% of the deans' responses, an increased interest in Prosthodontics was reported, whereas 16 deans reported no change in the level of interest. One or more open faculty positions in Prosthodontics existed at 29 dental schools, and 28 schools offered at least one incentive or a variety of incentives to recruit faculty. The respondents to the deans' survey revealed predoctoral student exposure to prosthodontists was high, and exposure to postgraduate Prosthodontics students was low. A survey of internal school programs that might have an impact on an increased interest in Prosthodontics revealed the presence of a predoctoral mentoring program for Prosthodontics in 80% of the institutions. The clinical curriculum included treatment of a variety of cases, including complex cases as defined by a diagnostic classification system. The response to whether dental specialties should be combined or remain individual provided some interesting data. Only 40.9% of the deans responded that Prosthodontics was a separate department. Conclusion: Dental school deans reported an increased interest in specialty training. Predoctoral student exposure to Prosthodontics was high due to the nature of their clinical experience and due to the exposure to full-time Prosthodontics faculty. Many dental schools have programs, such as mentoring and new technology, which might have an impact on predoctoral students' increased interest in Prosthodontics.
-
a survey of program directors trends challenges and mentoring in Prosthodontics part 1
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2007Co-Authors: Robert F Wright, Ryan A Dunlop, Chester W DouglassAbstract:Purpose: This study consisted of two parts. Part 1, a survey of program directors, was conducted to examine current trends in advanced education in Prosthodontics in the United States. Part 2 will report on the survey results distributed to the deans of US dental schools to evaluate their observations of trends in Prosthodontics. Materials and Methods: A national e-mail survey of 45 program directors was used to collect enrollment data for years 1 to 3 of Prosthodontics training for US and international dental school graduates, the total number of applicants and applications considered, and the trends over time of applicants to prosthodontic programs for US dental school graduates and for international graduates. In addition, the program directors were asked to rank 13 key factors that may have contributed to any changes in the prosthodontic applicant pool. Comments were accepted on why more or less US- or internationally trained applicants have applied. Program directors were also asked for information on student financial incentives, whether their programs were state or federally funded, and whether their sponsoring institution was a dental school. Results: Of the 45 program directors, 39 responded, for an 86.7% response rate. Respondents reported that 64% of their enrollments were graduates of US dental schools. Between 2000 and 2004 the applicant pool in Prosthodontics increased by 23%, with 41% of program directors reporting an increase in US-trained applicants, 46.2% reporting no change, and only 12.8% reporting a decrease. Using the Spearman correlation, there was a moderate, positive statistically significant correlation that the following factors contributed to an increase in the number of US dental graduates applying to prosthodontic programs: (1) mentoring by prosthodontists at the predoctoral level, (2) interest in Prosthodontics among US dental students, and (3) society's demand for a higher level of training and credentialing, (4) data depicting current and projected income for dental specialists, and (5) number of trained prosthodontists full- or part-time faculty at the predoctoral level. Only five programs offered no financial packages to offset tuition. The remaining 34 respondents reported some financial package. Among the respondents, there were 25 state-sponsored programs, 9 sponsored by private universities, and 5 sponsored by hospitals or federal agencies. Conclusion: An increased applicant pool and more US-trained applicants to Prosthodontics programs create a more competitive applicant pool for our specialty. Program directors reported that factors such as mentoring, society's demand for a higher level of training and credentialing, data depicting current and projected income for prosthodontists, exposure to prosthodontic faculty at the predoctoral level, the dollar value of prosthodontic training, and advances in implant, aesthetic, and reconstructive dentistry have all had some impact on increasing the applicant pool to prosthodontic training in the United States.
Bruce R Donoff - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a 10 year survey of us deans trends challenges and mentoring in Prosthodontics part 2
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2012Co-Authors: Brian M Chang, Bruce R Donoff, Taru Kinnunen, Deborah M Munoz, Robert F WrightAbstract:Purpose: Part 2 of this survey reports on the 2009 survey findings distributed to the deans of US dental schools. A national, electronic survey of 58 dental school deans was distributed by e-mail to evaluate an interest in specialty training, an interest in specialty training in Prosthodontics, faculty shortage issues, predoctoral curriculum in Prosthodontics, ideology regarding dental specialties, and the administrative position of Prosthodontics within the schools. Materials and Methods: The survey data were transferred to an online spreadsheet program for statistical analysis (Key Survey, Inc. http://www.keysurvey.com, Braintree, MA). The opinions of dental school deans were viewed as legitimate indicators of change within predoctoral and postdoctoral prosthodontic education. Statistical analysis was carried out using Statistica Version 9.1 (Statsoft, Tulsa, OK). Results: Of the 58 deans, 42 deans responded, for a 72.4% response rate. Twenty-three deans reported an increase in the number of students seeking specialty training after dental school. Only three deans reported a decrease in those seeking specialty training. In the 2009 survey, 45% the deans responded that there was an increased interest in Prosthodontics. One or more open faculty positions in Prosthodontics existed at 24 (59%) of the dental schools, and 30 (71%) offered at least one incentive or a variety of incentives to recruit faculty. The 2009 respondents to the deans’ survey revealed predoctoral student exposure to prosthodontists was high, and exposure to advanced education in Prosthodontics students was low. A survey of internal school programs that might have an impact on an increased interest in Prosthodontics revealed the presence of a predoctoral mentoring program for Prosthodontics in 36 (88%) of the institutions. The clinical curriculum included treatment of a variety of cases including complex cases as defined by a diagnostic classification system. The 2009 survey respondents reported an increase in the number of schools where Prosthodontics is a separate entity or department. Conclusion: Deans reported an increased interest in Prosthodontics in the 2009 survey. Open faculty positions in Prosthodontics existed in the majority of dental schools, and most schools offered incentives to recruit faculty. The survey of deans found a very high level of exposure of dental students to full-time prosthodontists and a very low exposure level to students enrolled in advanced education in Prosthodontics. The establishment of mentoring programs in Prosthodontics was reported by most deans, and the predoctoral curriculum included treating complex cases. Most deans stated that dual-specialty training in Prosthodontics and periodontics would be beneficial. The 2009 survey reported an increase in the number of departments of Prosthodontics in US schools.
-
a survey of deans trends challenges and mentoring in Prosthodontics part 2
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2008Co-Authors: Robert F Wright, Ryan A Dunlop, Hanspeter Weber, Bruce R DonoffAbstract:Purpose: This study consists of two parts. Part 1, a survey of program directors, was conducted to examine current trends in advanced education in Prosthodontics in the United States. Part 2 reports on the findings of a survey distributed to the deans of US dental schools to evaluate their observations of trends in prosthodontic education. Materials and Methods: A national, electronic survey of 55 dental school deans was distributed by e-mail to evaluate an interest in specialty training, an interest in specialization in Prosthodontics, faculty shortages, programs to address faculty shortages, predoctoral curriculum in Prosthodontics, opinions regarding dental specialties, and the administrative position of Prosthodontics within the schools. Results: Of the 55 deans, 44 deans responded, an 80% response rate. Only five deans reported a decrease in the number of students seeking specialty training after dental school. The remaining 39 deans reported a large increase, slight increase, or no change in those seeking specialty training. In 29.6% of the deans' responses, an increased interest in Prosthodontics was reported, whereas 16 deans reported no change in the level of interest. One or more open faculty positions in Prosthodontics existed at 29 dental schools, and 28 schools offered at least one incentive or a variety of incentives to recruit faculty. The respondents to the deans' survey revealed predoctoral student exposure to prosthodontists was high, and exposure to postgraduate Prosthodontics students was low. A survey of internal school programs that might have an impact on an increased interest in Prosthodontics revealed the presence of a predoctoral mentoring program for Prosthodontics in 80% of the institutions. The clinical curriculum included treatment of a variety of cases, including complex cases as defined by a diagnostic classification system. The response to whether dental specialties should be combined or remain individual provided some interesting data. Only 40.9% of the deans responded that Prosthodontics was a separate department. Conclusion: Dental school deans reported an increased interest in specialty training. Predoctoral student exposure to Prosthodontics was high due to the nature of their clinical experience and due to the exposure to full-time Prosthodontics faculty. Many dental schools have programs, such as mentoring and new technology, which might have an impact on predoctoral students' increased interest in Prosthodontics.
Cortino Sukotjo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Prosthodontic Implant Club at UIC, Program Description and Survey Analysis.
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2015Co-Authors: Michelle Howard Rynn, Fatemeh S. Afshari, Justin Schneider, Judy Chia Chun Yuan, Rand Harlow, Kent L. Knoernschild, Stephen D. Campbell, Cortino SukotjoAbstract:Purpose This study aims to (1) describe the Predoctoral Implant Club at UIC (PIC-UIC) mentoring model while providing a rationale for the program and (2) investigate PIC members’ perception about the club and Prosthodontics in general via a questionnaire and focus group discussion. Materials and Methods A survey to investigate PIC members’ perception regarding the club was distributed at a meeting. The survey consisted of questions about the members’ prior exposure to Prosthodontics, faculty, and residents; current exposure to and perceptions of Prosthodontics; future outcomes from membership; and possible improvements to PIC-UIC. Four student members of PIC-UIC participated in a focus group discussion about their exposure to Prosthodontics during each year of their training, their exposure to Prosthodontics following PIC-UIC membership, including rotations in the advanced prosthodontic clinic, mentorships by prosthodontic faculty and residents, and attendance at the American College of Prosthodontists Annual Session. Results Following PIC-UIC membership, students indicated an increased exposure to Prosthodontics and prosthodontic faculty. More than a third of the respondents indicated that they are “likely” to consider a prosthodontic residency after having joined PIC-UIC. Almost two-thirds of the respondents indicated that they would recommend PIC to students at other universities and believed their understanding of the prosthodontic specialty has increased. Students who participated in the focus group agreed they had little exposure to Prosthodontics, prosthodontic faculty, and advanced restorative procedures in the beginning of their dental education. They felt that involvement in PIC-UIC was a valuable experience that helped them consider or reinforced their decision to pursue Prosthodontics as a career. Conclusions PIC-UIC increased predoctoral students’ interest in Prosthodontics. Involving prosthodontic faculty and residents in mentoring and educational activities was evaluated positively by students. PIC-UIC may serve as a pipeline program for predoctoral students at other dental schools.
-
gender disparities in Prosthodontics authorship and leadership 13 years of observation
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2010Co-Authors: Suchada Kongkiatkamon, Judy Chia Chun Yuan, Kent L. Knoernschild, Stephen D. Campbell, Cortino SukotjoAbstract:PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine gender disparities in Prosthodontics by reviewing the trend of female authorship in prosthodontic journals and exploring the role of female leadership in prosthodontic organizations and Advanced Education in Prosthodontic (AEP) programs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three journals representing the prosthodontic specialty were selected to analyze the percentage of female dentist first and last (senior) authors for the years 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2008. Article inclusion criteria were restricted to the first or last authors who held at least a DMD/DDS/BDS degree and were from U.S. institutions. Data on female leadership in prosthodontic organizations and advanced education programs were collected, and the trends were studied. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. A linear regression analysis was performed to investigate the proportion of female authorship compared to male in the dental literature. A Fisher's Exact Test was performed to contrast differences of female first and last authorship in the selected journals between years 1995 and 2008. RESULTS: Overall, there was no statistically significant linear increase in the proportion of either first or last female authorship compared to male authorship over time. With respect to each journal, the linear regression analysis showed that the increase of first female authorship was statistically significant (p= 0.016) compared to male authorship only in the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. The percentage of female presidents of prosthodontic organizations has been very limited. A similar trend was also observed in AEP program director positions. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past 13 years, female dentists' participation in Prosthodontics literature authorship has not increased significantly in the United States. Furthermore, female involvement in Prosthodontics leadership has been limited over the past decades.
-
advanced education in Prosthodontics residents perspectives on their current training and future goals
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2010Co-Authors: Zeyad H Alsowygh, Cortino SukotjoAbstract:Purpose: The purposes of this study were to identify current prosthodontic residents’ demographics and to document prosthodontic residents’ perspectives on their clinical training and future goals. Materials and Methods: A 52-item survey was created and distributed to prosthodontic residents in the United States on February 8, 2007. The data collected were analyzed; the means and standard deviations were calculated and ranked. Statistical analysis was conducted using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney analysis (p= 0.05). Results: A 43% response rate was achieved, representing approximately 48% of the total population of prosthodontic residents in the United States. The majority of residents ranked clinical education as the most important factor in selecting their programs, were satisfied with their training, and planned to pursue the certification of the American Board of Prosthodontics. When asked how often they planned to work, 4 days a week was the most common answer. Conclusion: This is the first report identifying current prosthodontic residents’ demographics and their perspectives on their clinical training and future goals. Several trends were identified, indicating a bright future for the specialty. By knowing the students’ perceptions regarding their training and future goals, the American College of Prosthodontists and/or program directors will be able to use this information to improve residency programs and the specialty.
-
students perceptions of Prosthodontics in a pbl hybrid curriculum
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2008Co-Authors: Cortino Sukotjo, Kewalin Thammasitboon, Howard Howell, Nadeem Y KarimbuxAbstract:Purpose: A survey was distributed to the Harvard School of Dental Medicine (HSDM) predoctoral student classes of 2005 and 2006 to assess their perceptions regarding preclinical Prosthodontics laboratory exercises. Prosthodontics curriculum clock hours, Prosthodontics teaching participation, and plans for specialization were also analyzed. We hypothesized that reduced hours and perceived stress in the Prosthodontics curriculum might impact students’ choice of specialty at HSDM Materials and Methods: HSDM preclinical Prosthodontics clock hours were compared with national means from published data. A survey was distributed to the HSDM classes of 2005 and 2006 (n = 70) at the end of their preclinical Prosthodontics laboratory exercises, prior to students seeing their first patient in the clinics. Results: A 100% response rate was achieved. Results from this study show that HSDM preclinical Prosthodontics clock hours are on average shorter than other schools. The majority of the students felt stressed during the laboratory exercises, and they felt they did not gain adequate knowledge from the lectures, resulting in low self-esteem (confidence) in treating patients in the clinic. Despite this perception, HSDM students do just as well, if not better, than other students, as judged by external and internal outcome measures. Graduate Prosthodontics specialization is still a specialty of choice among the graduates when compared to national data. Conclusions: The shortened preclinical didactic and laboratory exercises in Prosthodontics at HSDM affect student anxiety, but not their didactic and clinical performances or their decisions in choosing their graduate program. Problem-based learning (PBL) tutorials help the students to integrate preclinical and clinical knowledge and skills in Prosthodontics.
Ryan A Dunlop - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a survey of deans trends challenges and mentoring in Prosthodontics part 2
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2008Co-Authors: Robert F Wright, Ryan A Dunlop, Hanspeter Weber, Bruce R DonoffAbstract:Purpose: This study consists of two parts. Part 1, a survey of program directors, was conducted to examine current trends in advanced education in Prosthodontics in the United States. Part 2 reports on the findings of a survey distributed to the deans of US dental schools to evaluate their observations of trends in prosthodontic education. Materials and Methods: A national, electronic survey of 55 dental school deans was distributed by e-mail to evaluate an interest in specialty training, an interest in specialization in Prosthodontics, faculty shortages, programs to address faculty shortages, predoctoral curriculum in Prosthodontics, opinions regarding dental specialties, and the administrative position of Prosthodontics within the schools. Results: Of the 55 deans, 44 deans responded, an 80% response rate. Only five deans reported a decrease in the number of students seeking specialty training after dental school. The remaining 39 deans reported a large increase, slight increase, or no change in those seeking specialty training. In 29.6% of the deans' responses, an increased interest in Prosthodontics was reported, whereas 16 deans reported no change in the level of interest. One or more open faculty positions in Prosthodontics existed at 29 dental schools, and 28 schools offered at least one incentive or a variety of incentives to recruit faculty. The respondents to the deans' survey revealed predoctoral student exposure to prosthodontists was high, and exposure to postgraduate Prosthodontics students was low. A survey of internal school programs that might have an impact on an increased interest in Prosthodontics revealed the presence of a predoctoral mentoring program for Prosthodontics in 80% of the institutions. The clinical curriculum included treatment of a variety of cases, including complex cases as defined by a diagnostic classification system. The response to whether dental specialties should be combined or remain individual provided some interesting data. Only 40.9% of the deans responded that Prosthodontics was a separate department. Conclusion: Dental school deans reported an increased interest in specialty training. Predoctoral student exposure to Prosthodontics was high due to the nature of their clinical experience and due to the exposure to full-time Prosthodontics faculty. Many dental schools have programs, such as mentoring and new technology, which might have an impact on predoctoral students' increased interest in Prosthodontics.
-
a survey of program directors trends challenges and mentoring in Prosthodontics part 1
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2007Co-Authors: Robert F Wright, Ryan A Dunlop, Chester W DouglassAbstract:Purpose: This study consisted of two parts. Part 1, a survey of program directors, was conducted to examine current trends in advanced education in Prosthodontics in the United States. Part 2 will report on the survey results distributed to the deans of US dental schools to evaluate their observations of trends in Prosthodontics. Materials and Methods: A national e-mail survey of 45 program directors was used to collect enrollment data for years 1 to 3 of Prosthodontics training for US and international dental school graduates, the total number of applicants and applications considered, and the trends over time of applicants to prosthodontic programs for US dental school graduates and for international graduates. In addition, the program directors were asked to rank 13 key factors that may have contributed to any changes in the prosthodontic applicant pool. Comments were accepted on why more or less US- or internationally trained applicants have applied. Program directors were also asked for information on student financial incentives, whether their programs were state or federally funded, and whether their sponsoring institution was a dental school. Results: Of the 45 program directors, 39 responded, for an 86.7% response rate. Respondents reported that 64% of their enrollments were graduates of US dental schools. Between 2000 and 2004 the applicant pool in Prosthodontics increased by 23%, with 41% of program directors reporting an increase in US-trained applicants, 46.2% reporting no change, and only 12.8% reporting a decrease. Using the Spearman correlation, there was a moderate, positive statistically significant correlation that the following factors contributed to an increase in the number of US dental graduates applying to prosthodontic programs: (1) mentoring by prosthodontists at the predoctoral level, (2) interest in Prosthodontics among US dental students, and (3) society's demand for a higher level of training and credentialing, (4) data depicting current and projected income for dental specialists, and (5) number of trained prosthodontists full- or part-time faculty at the predoctoral level. Only five programs offered no financial packages to offset tuition. The remaining 34 respondents reported some financial package. Among the respondents, there were 25 state-sponsored programs, 9 sponsored by private universities, and 5 sponsored by hospitals or federal agencies. Conclusion: An increased applicant pool and more US-trained applicants to Prosthodontics programs create a more competitive applicant pool for our specialty. Program directors reported that factors such as mentoring, society's demand for a higher level of training and credentialing, data depicting current and projected income for prosthodontists, exposure to prosthodontic faculty at the predoctoral level, the dollar value of prosthodontic training, and advances in implant, aesthetic, and reconstructive dentistry have all had some impact on increasing the applicant pool to prosthodontic training in the United States.
Gerald S Weintraub - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the dental student as a technician preclinical and clinical laboratory programs in fixed Prosthodontics
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2001Co-Authors: Vicki C Petropoulos, Annette M Weintraub, Gerald S WeintraubAbstract:Purpose A 2-part survey of United States dental schools was conducted. The first part of the survey was published in 1998 and determined the curricular structure, techniques taught, and materials used in predoctoral fixed Prosthodontics courses. The purpose of the second part of the survey was to ascertain the delegation of laboratory procedures in preclinical and clinical fixed prosthodontic programs. Materials and Methods The survey was mailed to the course directors of predoctoral fixed prosthodontic programs at 53 US dental schools. Of these, 42 schools returned the completed survey, resulting in a response rate of 79%. Results Results from this survey show that certain laboratory procedures in preclinical and clinical fixed Prosthodontics are completed by dental laboratories (either in-house or commercially available laboratories). Conclusions For the preclinical programs of fixed Prosthodontics, there is more student involvement in the completion of laboratory procedures in the dental schools surveyed. In clinical fixed prosthodontic programs, there is a high emphasis on patient care and less on laboratory techniques that can be delegated to laboratory technicians.
-
the dental student as technician an 18 year follow up of preclinical laboratory programs
Journal of Prosthodontics, 1997Co-Authors: Annette M Weintraub, Gerald S WeintraubAbstract:In 1977, a survey of American and Canadian dental schools was conducted by Weintraub to determine the delegation of laboratory procedures in preclinical and clinical complete and removable partial denture programs. This was performed in light of challenges raised to the value of requiring dental students, rather than laboratory technicians, to perform the various laboratory procedures involved in the fabrication of complete and removable partial dentures. Since 1977, the rate of edentulism has declined in the United States, and fewer edentulous patients have sought regular dental care. In addition, approximately 20% fewer curriculum hours have been spent in dental schools in removable prosthodontic instruction; a declining number of graduating dental students have felt comfortable with their level of knowledge of removable Prosthodontics, especially complete dentures, and have performed fewer removable prosthodontic procedures in practice because of a perceived lack of treatment cost-effectiveness. The present study, an 18-year follow-up to the 1977 survey, was designed to determine if such trends toward a deemphasis on removable prosthodontic treatment have affected the mechanisms of instruction in and the extent to which dental schools instruct students about removable Prosthodontics laboratory procedures. The 1995 survey was mailed to 53 American dental schools. Forty-six schools returned the completed survey, for a response rate of 87%. Results showed that the proportion of schools with removable prosthodontic preclinical programs, especially those in removable partial dentures, increased, as did the relative amount of material presented to students in these programs. This was accomplished primarily through the enhancement of laboratory technician support, both in-house and commercial, of student preclinical removable prosthodontic laboratory procedures. The conflict between these outcomes and the call by the dental community, as well as that of the 1995 Institute of Medicine Study, for a reduced emphasis on teaching students about the technical details involved in removable prosthesis fabrication is recognized and explored.
