Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The authors evaluated the effectiveness of using a patient simulator (MARC Patient Simulator [MARC PS], BlueLight analytics, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada), to instruct dental students (DS) on how to deliver energy optimally to a restoration from a curing light. Five months later, the authors evaluated the retention of the instruction provided to the DS.
Methods: Toward the end of the DS' first year of dental education, the authors evaluated the light-curing techniques of one-half of the class of first-year DS (Group 1) before and after receiving instruction by means of the patient simulator. Five months later, they retested DS in Group 1 and tested the remaining first-year DS who were then second-year DS and who had received no instruction by means of the patient simulator (Group 2). They gave DS in Group 1 and Group 2 MARC PS instruction and retested them. The authors also the tested fourth-year DS (Group 3) and dentists (Group 4) by using the MARC PS before giving any instruction by means of the MARC PS.
Results: The results of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that there were no significant differences in the ability of dentists and DS to light cure a simulated restoration before they received instruction by means of the patient simulator (P = .26). The results of two-way ANOVA and Fisher protected least significant difference tests showed that after receiving instruction by means of the patient simulator, DS delivered significantly more energy to a simulated restoration, and this skill was retained. There were no significant differences between DS in Group 1 and Group 2 after they had received instruction by means of the patient simulator.
Conclusions: The abilities of dentists and DS to light cure a simulated restoration were not significantly different. Hands-on teaching using a patient simulator enhanced the ability of DS to use a curing light. This skill was retained for at least five months.
Practical Implications: The education provided to dentists and DS is insufficient to teach them how to deliver the optimum amount of energy from a curing light. Better teaching and understanding of the importance of light curing is required.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.14219/jada.2013.17 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!