Pre‐doctoral dental students’ computer‐aided design/computer‐aided manufacturing‐related education, knowledge, attitudes and behavior: A national survey

• Published in: Journal of dental education Vol. 87; no. 4; pp. 562 - 571
• Main Authors: Alhamed, Farah J., Neiva, Gisele F., Bak, Sun‐Yung, Karl, Elisabeta, Inglehart, Marita R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.04.2023
• Subjects: CAD/CAM; Computer-Aided Design; curriculum; dental; dental computer‐aided design; dental curriculum; Dental Prosthesis Design; education; educational technology; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Prosthodontics - education; schools; students; Students, Dental; technology; education; dental; dental curriculum; schools; CAD/CAM; dental computer-aided design; students; curriculum; technology; educational technology
• DOI: 10.1002/jdd.13144
• ISSN: 0022-0337

Objectives Computer‐aided design/computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology transformed the world of restorative dentistry. The objectives were to assess pre‐doctoral dental students’ CAD/CAM‐related education, knowledge, attitudes, and professional behavior, and to explore the relationships between the year in dental school and these constructs. Methods A total of 358 pre‐doctoral dental students from 17 of the 68 US dental schools responded to a web‐based anonymous survey. Results CAD/CAM‐related classroom‐based education was likely to happen in lectures (87.2%) and simulated exercises as part of a class (86.9%). Faculty were most likely to provide CAD/CAM instruction (87.9%), with staff (44.8%) and dental technicians (20.2%) being engaged as well. Preclinical education included video demonstrations (81.8%), demonstrations during a lecture (76.4%) or for smaller groups of students (69.2%), hands‐on workshops (65.6%), and individual instruction (50.4%). Considering the digital workflow in clinics, 45.2% reported using intraoral scans. The more advanced the students were in their program, the more CAD/CAM knowledge (r = 0.27; p < 0.001) and knowledge about what can be fabricated with CAD/CAM technology they had (r = 0.25; p < 0.001). However, the student's satisfaction with the education about CAD/CAM did not increase over the years (r = −0.04; n.s.) and remained neutral, while their attitudes became more positive the longer they were in dental school (r = 0.13; p < 0.05). Their attitudes were quite positive, with most students considering that CAD/CAM is the future of dentistry (5 = most positive: Mean = 4.34), agreeing that they enjoyed working with CAD/CAM (Mean = 4.11) and that CAD/CAM has the potential of making them a better dentist (Mean = 4.07). Conclusions The majority of students in the US dental schools appreciate CAD/CAM technology, consider it to be the future of dentistry, and believe it makes them better dentists. The fact that the majority is not satisfied with their classroom‐based, preclinical and clinical CAD/CAM‐related education should therefore be a call to action to rethink dental school curricula in this content area.