Consolidating human disease learning in the Dental Emergency Clinic

Chairside learning on undergraduate clinics: general dental and human disease themes

Introduction Chairside teaching is an important part of dental undergraduate clinical education. Bedside teaching is well-reported in relation to undergraduate medicine but few publications relate to undergraduate dentistry.Aims and objectives To investigate the experience and benefits from chairside teaching/learning in the clinical years of a five-year dental programme in a UK university. We asked about general dental topic learning as well as human disease (HD) learning.Materials and methods An online survey gathered dental students' opinions on their recognition, knowledge and experience of chairside teaching/learning. We asked about clinics and clinicians and where they gained most from chairside teaching/learning. We encouraged free-text responses.Results Altogether, 127 students took part (62% response). Response rates approximated 60% for all three years. In total, 93% felt that chairside teaching/learning helped to a moderate/great extent for general dental topics and 73% felt that chairside teaching/learning helped to a moderate/great extent for HD topics. Free-text comments revealed students valued chairside teaching/learning and from which grade/level of staff they learned most.Discussion and conclusion Chairside teaching/learning is largely unreported and unrecognised in undergraduate education. Although not formally timetabled, enthusiastic staff with enough time to engage in chairside teaching can have a positive impact on student learning.

Medical history complexity of patients attending dental student restorative treatment clinics compared with dental emergency clinics

INTRODUCTION

Dental students should graduate from undergraduate programmes with the knowledge and skills to safely manage patients. This requires exposure to patients with a range of medical needs, which may impact the planning and delivery of care.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

We wished to establish the medical history complexity of patients presenting to student restorative clinics and compare them to patients attending a dental emergency clinic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We recorded the medical history data of 200 anonymised patients attending student restorative clinics and compared them to previously collected data from 200 dental emergency clinic patients. We collected basic demographic data (age/gender) and noted the number of medical disorders, amount of comorbidity and the number and types of medications for each patient.

RESULTS

The age and medical complexity of patients were different, with fewer young patients seen in the dental restorative clinics. Patients attending restorative clinics were more likely to have multiple comorbidities and took greater numbers and types of medications than those seen in dental emergency clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients seen in student restorative clinics, medical histories are taken once at the beginning of care and the subsequent treatment plan is delivered over many appointments accounting for that medical history. Emergency clinic patients attend for single treatment episodes and their medical complexity is immediately relevant to the treatment offered. Students have multiple, single encounters with patients in emergency clinics. In both clinics, dental treatment plans need to be adjusted to account for patients' drugs and diseases, providing opportunities to consolidate human disease learning.