Dataset Information

Bridging gaps in oral health education in a medical school in the United States: a pilot study

ABSTRACT:

Background

Oral health is an important component of medical education given its connection to overall health and quality of life; however, oral health is infrequently incorporated into medical school curricula in the United States. The aim of this study was to pilot a novel oral health care clerkship for United States medical students that implemented the Smiles for Life (SFL) curriculum, in-person clinical activities, and pre and post curricula assessments to assess knowledge acquisition, attitude change, and clinical skill development.

Methods

Third year medical students at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, volunteered (n = 37) for a clerkship in oral health. Students completed the Smiles For Life National Oral Health Curriculum and participated in three half-day clinical sessions in a hospital-based dental clinic. The participants were evaluated on knowledge acquisition, attitude change, and clinical skill development through a pre and post clerkship assessment in order to assess the efficacy of the intervention.

Results

There was a 23.4% increase in oral health knowledge (p < 0.001) following participation in the online modules and clerkship. Additionally, attitudes in the following domains showed improved familiarity and proficiency: causes and prevention of dental caries (78.4%, p < 0.001) and periodontal disease (83.8%, p < 0.001), provision of oral health information to patients (67.6%, p < 0.001), and ability to conduct an oral examination (62.2%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Third year medical students who participated in a novel oral health clerkship demonstrated significant increases in basic oral health knowledge and reported increased comfort in providing oral examinations and anticipatory guidance to patients. The results support the feasibility of this approach to incorporating oral health education into a medical school curriculum in the United States.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-022-03648-5.

SUBMITTER: Morel M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9330983 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesAn unintended consequence of electronic medical record use in the United States is the potential effect on graduate physician training. We assessed educational burdens and benefits of electronic medical record use on United States nephrology fellows by means of a survey.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe used an anonymous online opinion survey of all United States nephrology program directors (n=148), their faculty, and fellows. Program directors forwarded survey links to fellows and clinical faculty, indicating to how many they forwarded the link. The three surveys had parallel questions to permit comparisons.ResultsTwenty-two percent of program directors (n=33) forwarded surveys to faculty (n=387) and fellows (n=216; 26% of United States nephrology fellows). Faculty and fellow response rates were 25% and 33%, respectively; 51% of fellows agreed/strongly agreed that the electronic medical record contributed positively to their education. Perceived positive effects included access flexibility and ease of obtaining laboratory/radiology results. Negative effects included copy-forward errors and excessive, irrelevant documentation. Electronic medical record function was reported to be slow, disrupted, or completely lost monthly or more by >40%, and these were significantly less likely to agree that the electronic medical record contributed positively to their education. Electronic medical record completion time demands contributed to fellow reluctance to do procedures (52%), participate in conferences (57%), prolong patient interactions (74%), and do patient-directed reading (55%). Sixty-five percent of fellows reported often/sometimes exceeding work-hours limits due to documentation time demands; 85% of faculty reported often/sometimes observing copy-forward errors. Limitations include potential nonresponse and social desirability bias.ConclusionsRespondents reported that the electronic medical record enhances fellow education with efficient and geographically flexible patient data access, but the time demands of data and order entry reduce engagement in educational activities, contribute to work-hours violations, and diminish direct patient interactions.

Project description:Introduction:Although education is among the major socioeconomic status (SES) resources that influence populations' and individuals' health, social marginalization may reduce the health gain that follows access to SES indicators such as education, a pattern called marginalization-related diminished return (MDR). The literature on MDRs, however, has been mainly derived from studies that have defined marginalization based on race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Thus, more research is needed on MDRs that may follow as a result of immigration. To extend what is known on immigration status related MDRs, this study compared a national sample of immigrants and non-immigrants for the effect of education on the poor self-rated health (SRH) of adults in the United States. Methods:With a cross-sectional design, this study employed data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a survey that had enrolled 33,654 adults who were either immigrants (n = 6225; 18.5%) or non-immigrants (n = 27 429; 81.5%). The independent variable was education level, treated as a categorical variable. The dependent variable was SRH treated as a dichotomous variable. Race, ethnicity, age, gender, marital status, and region were the confounders. Immigration (nativity) was the moderator. Logistic regression was used for data analysis. Results:Higher education credentials were associated with better SRH in the pooled sample; however, immigration showed a significant statistical interaction with education level (college graduation) on the outcome. This interaction was indicative of a smaller protective effect of college graduation on poor SRH among immigrants than non-immigrant adults. Conclusion:In line with the MDRs framework, the effect of education on SRH is weaker for immigrants than for non-immigrant adults. There is a need to help highly educated immigrants to mobilize their human capital to secure their best health outcomes, similar to non-immigrants. Such strategies may require bold and innovative policy solutions to reduce discrimination against immigrants, so they can more effectively translate their education and human capital into tangible outcomes such as health.