Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the learning in the implant dentistry hands-on course to that of the flipped classroom (FC) and the traditional lecture cohorts (control).
Materials And Methods: In this study,80 students were enrolled for the first time in an implant dentistry program. Subsequently, they were divided into two groups. The first, the FC group, which had free access to a video with a PowerPoint presentation on the Chaoxing-WHU-MOOC platform about the implant placement on first molar sites before class. The second, the control group, which attended a didactic lecture describing implant practice on the first molar site via a bidirectional multimedia interactive teaching demonstration and then operated on a simulation model. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and the deviation gauge were utilized to analyze the accuracy of the implant placement in the students' models. An online satisfaction questionnaire was distributed to both groups one week after the class.
Results: The linear deviation of the CBCT examination did not show any statistical difference between the two groups concerning cervical, apex, and angular. A significant buccal deviation was observed in the control group compared with the FC group (mean: 0.7436 mm vs. 0.2875 mm, p = 0.0035), according to the restoration-level deviation gauge. A total of 74.36% of students in the FC group placed implant within 0.5 mm buccal-to-lingual deviations, but only 41.03% of students in the control group reached within 0.5 mm buccal-to-lingual deviation ranges. Additionally, 91.67% of the students in the FC group and 97.5% of the students in the control group were satisfied with the practical implant class.
Conclusion: FC was more effective than a didactic lecture for implant dentistry practical skill acquisition.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11097408 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05536-6 | DOI Listing |
Tissue Eng Regen Med
January 2025
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 172 Dolma-ro, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, 13620, Republic of Korea.
Background: Traditionally, dental implants require a healing period of 4 to 9 months for osseointegration, with longer recovery times considered when bone grafting is needed. This retrospective study evaluates the clinical efficacy of demineralized dentin matrix (DDM) combined with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) during dental implant placement to expedite the osseointegration period for early loading.
Methods: Thirty patients (17 male, 13 female; mean age 55.
BMC Oral Health
January 2025
Removable Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, October 6 University, Giza, Egypt.
Background: The continuous development in digital prosthodontics allowed the customization of attachments and retentive inserts which offers an easy and cheap solution for regular maintenance of locator overdentures during daily practice. The present study compared the change in retention values of the fully digitally manufactured custom-made locator attachment retentive insert with the ready-made ones after insertion, removal, and masticatory cycles.
Methods: A complete denture was constructed over a mandibular edentulous epoxy model.
Clin Oral Implants Res
January 2025
Second Dental Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Objectives: WNT10A mutations are associated with tooth agenesis. This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of dental implants in patients carrying WNT10A mutations with different molecular statuses and phenotypes over a long-term follow-up period.
Materials And Methods: Patients with tooth agenesis were screened by whole-exome sequencing (WES) from January 2010 to September 2023.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res
February 2025
State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Stomatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Objectives: To compare the clinical effectiveness of a novel bioceramic (BC) with a control xenograft (BO) for guided bone regeneration (GBR) performed simultaneously with implant placement.
Materials And Methods: This clinical study enrolled patients with insufficient bone volume who required GBR during implant placement to increase bone width using either BC or BO. Outcome measures included a dimensional reduction in buccal bone thickness measured by cone beam computed tomography performed immediately post-surgery and at 6 months postoperatively (ΔHBBT), soft tissue healing at 14 days, 1 month, and 6 months postoperatively, and complications rates.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res
February 2025
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Introduction: Implantology has become a primary solution for tooth loss due to excellent osseointegration and high long-term success rates. However, complications such as abutment screw loosening, especially in implant-supported single crowns, compromise prosthesis longevity. Anaerobic adhesives (AAs) have shown promise in mechanical fields for preventing screw loosening, but their effectiveness in dental implants, particularly zirconia, remains uncertain.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!