Search

With dental caries being a common chronic disease in children and adults, oral health literacy is needed to improve oral health and prevent caries. If oral health providers themselves are confused about preventive strategies, they cannot effectively educate the public or other health care providers. The aim of this study was to assess University of Maryland dental hygiene students' understanding of and ability to communicate caries preventive strategies to low-income populations during a community service-learning program in 2013 and 2014. Fifty baccalaureate degree dental hygiene students were asked to complete surveys before and after receiving a presentation on caries preventive strategies and after an outreach event, and 77 low-income caregivers were asked to complete surveys before and after receiving oral health education from the students. The key knowledge question on all surveys asked respondents to select the "single best way to prevent tooth decay" (i.e., provide caries prevention) from a list that included the following items: limit sweets, going to the dentist, brushing teeth, using fluoride toothpaste, flossing, drinking fluoridated water, fluoride varnish, and sealants. Of the 50 students, 41 completed all three surveys, for a response rate of 82%; all 77 caregivers (100%) completed the survey before the counseling session, and 37 (48%) completed the survey afterwards. While the results showed a significant knowledge increase for the students that drinking fluoridated water is the best caries prevention strategy, only 44% of them correctly ranked that option first even on the final survey, and only 8% of the caregivers ranked that option first even after counseling. These results suggested that neither the students nor the caregivers understood the benefits of community water fluoridation (CWF), even after the interventions. In spite of their low knowledge scores, it was encouraging that 86-92% of the caregivers reported that the students demonstrated respect for them and spent an appropriate amount of time with them and that they understood the information the students communicated. In discussions after the surveys, the students reported that they had received inconsistent messages from faculty members regarding the benefits of CWF, which resulted in their confusion. These results led the authors to revise their program's instruction to increase the students' knowledge of caries prevention strategies.

The purpose of this research project was to determine how many U.S. dental hygiene (DH) programs had full-time (FT) faculty members who provided direct patient care unrelated to the curriculum. Questions in this project also assessed attitudes and opinions of DH directors regarding clinical practice and opportunities for salary supplementation. A questionnaire of twenty open-ended and closed-ended questions was designed on Survey Monkey, an online survey engine. After IRB approval and pilot testing, 278 U.S. DH program directors received two emails with the survey link requesting their participation. A response rate of 69.1 percent (n=192) was achieved. Results revealed that 14.2 percent of the programs required FT DH faculties to participate in clinical practice settings unrelated to the curriculum, while 67 percent of the programs had faculties who also participated in clinical practice. Eighty-three percent of respondents reported faculties who participated in clinical practice were financially compensated. The majority (95.4 percent) of directors indicated maintaining clinical skills was an advantage to clinical practice, while 48 percent of directors indicated participation takes time away from being an educator. Overall, the majority of DH programs did not require FT faculties to participate in clinical practice; however, respondents were generally in favor of allowing faculties the opportunity to practice and thought that it enhanced their competency as clinical instructors.

The purpose of this research project was to determine how many U.S. dental hygiene (DH) programs had full-time (FT) faculty members who provided direct patient care unrelated to the curriculum. Questions in this project also assessed attitudes and opinions of DH directors regarding clinical practice and opportunities for salary supplementation. A questionnaire of twenty open-ended and closed-ended questions was designed on Survey Monkey, an online survey engine. After IRB approval and pilot testing, 278 U.S. DH program directors received two emails with the survey link requesting their participation. A response rate of 69.1 percent (n=192) was achieved. Results revealed that 14.2 percent of the programs required FT DH faculties to participate in clinical practice settings unrelated to the curriculum, while 67 percent of the programs had faculties who also participated in clinical practice. Eighty-three percent of respondents reported faculties who participated in clinical practice were financially compensated. The majority (95.4 percent) of directors indicated maintaining clinical skills was an advantage to clinical practice, while 48 percent of directors indicated participation takes time away from being an educator. Overall, the majority of DH programs did not require FT faculties to participate in clinical practice; however, respondents were generally in favor of allowing faculties the opportunity to practice and thought that it enhanced their competency as clinical instructors.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between individual learning styles, test performance, and attitudes toward the use of Web-based self-instruction and slide/audiotape self-instructionParticipants consisted of 33 junior, first-year dental hygiene students enrolled in a university-based dental hygiene program. A stratified random allocation (by gender, English as a second language, and prior dental experience) and random number table were used to assign participants into one of two groups. Group one studied the mandibular arch using the slide/audiotape format and the maxillary arch using the Web-based format, and group two studied the mandibular arch using the Web-based format and the maxillary arch using the slide/audiotape format. A post-test was taken at the completion of each instructional format. The Kolb Learning Style Inventory was used to assess preferred learning styles, and a written survey was used for instructional format preference. Descriptive analyses, Pearson correlations, and unpaired t-tests were used to analyze the data.Thirty-one subjects completed the study. By group, no difference in mean post-test performance was seen based on the sequence or order of instructional method (P0.05) or by arch (P0.05). No difference in post-test performance based on Web-based and slide-tape instructional methods was seen. Predominate learning style did not predict preference of instructional format nor were they correlated with post-test scores. However, almost 70% of all participants reported that they preferred using the Web-based format to the slide/audiotape.A variety of learning styles and preferences may be accommodated when substituting Web-based self-instruction for slide/audiotape self-instruction in normal radiographic anatomy.