Logo Medical Science Monitor

Call: +1.631.470.9640
Mon - Fri 10:00 am - 02:00 pm EST

Contact Us

Logo Medical Science Monitor Logo Medical Science Monitor Logo Medical Science Monitor

15 July 2024: Clinical Research  

Assessment of Digital Dentistry Knowledge and Practices Among Dental Students at King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia

Muhammad Farooq Umer1ACDEF*, Muhammad Faheemuddin2ACDEF, Yazeed Ali Alshehri3BCFG, Abdulmalik Abdullah Algosaibi3BCFG, Abdulaziz Ali Alojail3ABDG, Abdullaziz Abdullah Althani3ABFG, Mohammed Abdulrahim Alnaim3ABDG, Sami Abdullah Alharbi3ABFG

DOI: 10.12659/MSM.944692

Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e944692

0 Comments

Abstract

0:00

BACKGROUND: Digital dental (DD) technologies need to be developed for dental use because of the prominent position that these technologies have recently acquired. This 21-item online questionnaire-based study aimed to assess the understanding of DD methods in 120 undergraduate dental students at King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia (SA).

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic surveys were sent to 123 dental students at different study phases (basic, preclinical, and clinical). Dental students were requested to answer the questionnaires in accordance with their knowledge, observations, particular experiences, and DD practice. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, which involved numerical values and ratios. Then, the associations among study level, knowledge, practice, and study phases were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests.

RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were returned by 120 students. The chi-square test showed significant differences in relation to questions “Do you have any previous knowledge of DD?”, “The field that uses DD the most is…”, “Does DD provide more precise results than conventional dentistry?”, and “Do you know about CAD/CAM?”, with P values of 0.006, 0.000, 0.018, and 0.002, respectively. Students at clinical phase exhibited significantly higher levels of knowledge than those at the preclinical phase (P<0.01). With regard to DD practice, 73.3% of students expressed a negative viewpoint, 82.5% stated that DD is essential for the future, and half said that practicing DD will result in improvements in patient satisfaction, time consumed, and level of predictability.

CONCLUSIONS: Students at basic, preclinical, and clinical phases had good knowledge on DD and were motivated to practice it in future in their workplaces.

Keywords: Dentistry, General Practice, Dental, Perception

Introduction

Digital dentistry (DD) has become popular in recent years, and it now plays a critical role in the advancement of dentistry. It also plays an increasingly important part in driving innovation and shaping students’ experiences in today’s dental education [1]. The computer has become a part of dentistry and provides more accurate, efficient, and quick treatment to patients compared with traditional dentistry [2,3]. It offers convenience by reducing chairside time and appointment visits and providing an economical treatment [4]. Similarly, it helps reduce the workload of dentists and laboratory technicians so that more patients can be treated. DD data can be stored in computer hardware through an oral scan [5].

Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) is the most frequently used DD [6]. It is a strategy for the future and has opened new paths in dental medicine and dental technology. The modern methods of CAD/CAM are constantly moving in new directions to provide innovative products and systems with the highest quality standards [6,7]. With their help, perfect clinical restorations can be achieved with high biocompatibility, no secondary reactions, excellent esthetics, and improved cooperation between dentists and dental laboratories [6–8].

Traditional laboratory techniques, such as waxing, casting, finishing, and tooth preparation exercises on a phantom head, are still used in most universities to educate dental students at basic and preclinical levels. The challenge is to implement new DD technologies, such as computer-aided learning, without disregarding the importance of manual skills training in dental treatment [9]. The advantage of DD technologies over conventional procedures is the former’s accuracy in reproducing details [9,10]. DD technologies have a smooth, flexible workflow and reduce costs and working time [11,12]. With current equipment, radiography has changed from 2D to 3D, and intraoral scanning is used as an alternative of conventional impression systems, prosthetics, and implant software. Milling machines and 3D printers are employed to quickly create esthetic and precise restorations [13], thus increasing efficiency and patient satisfaction [14].

Surveys have been conducted in various countries to assess the knowledge and practice of DD across the globe. In a 2016 survey performed in the UK, 55.6% of the respondents did not use DD because of its high cost [15]. In the Netherlands, DD use is high, especially among practice owners [16]. In India, a study among dental practitioners found that 96.7% of practitioners are aware of CAD/CAM technology in dentistry, and 87% believe that lack of knowledge, not high cost, is the major shortcoming of CAD/CAM [17]. Another study concluded that 74% of undergraduate students are unaware of the materials used to fabricate CAD/CAM prostheses [18]. In Egypt, the market for DD has grown considerably, especially in private dental practice, even though the majority of dentists are working in the governmental sector [19].

Local studies in Saudi Arabia (SA) have shown that the majority of individuals (98.5%) believe that DD improves the quality of dentistry and will ultimately replace traditional dental facilities [20,21]. Madfa et al studied the level of knowledge among preclinical, clinical, and intern students at the College of Dentistry, Hail University, and concluded that DD knowledge gradually increases with the study level [22]. Radwan et al reported that clinical trials and hands-on training courses can help overcome barriers to adoption of new DD [23].

In SA, Alfallaj et al found that only 65.4% of local dental schools integrate DD into their undergraduate curricula [24]. Internationally and in other SA dental colleges, a systematic review concluded that digital technology tools and applications are now prevalent in daily dental medicine and care. At present, digital dental education encompasses several areas of teaching interests, including Web-based knowledge assignment and specific technologies such as digital surface mapping, dental simulator motor skills including intraoral scanner, and digital radiography [25]. A 2024 study by Aldowah et al concluded that dental undergraduate students had limited knowledge about artificial intelligence (AI) as DD, and this type of DD must apply additional effort to prepare students for the era of AI as DD [26]

In 2016, King Faisal University (KFU) launched a 6-year undergraduate Bachelor of Dental Science (BDS) program that consists of 3 study phases. The first phase is the basic studying phase, which covers basic subjects with a minimum number of credit hours; it is usually for the first 2-year program. The preclinical phase is implemented during the third and fourth years, and the clinical phase is the final 2 years of the program and has the largest number of credit hours among the 3 phases. Since the launch of the program, 9 student cohorts have been enrolled, and 3 cohorts of graduates have been produced over 3 years [27]. Only a few courses are conducted on DD during the undergraduate program at different phases. The teaching modules are a lecture-based instruction for basic phase and a mixture of individual and inquiry-based learning in preclinical and clinical phases.

Given the importance of DD for future practice, DD has been studied by various scholars. Research on the use of DD among SA dental students needs to be conducted to thoroughly recognize the current situation, address the knowledge gap in this vital field, and offer a basis for future research. Scientific investigation is also necessary to help academicians assess the present situation, adjust curricula appropriately, and enhance future developments in this crucial field [22]. Therefore, this 21-item online questionnaire-based study aimed to evaluate the understanding of digital dentistry methods in 120 undergraduate dental students at King Faisal Complex, SA.

Material and Methods

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, AND POPULATION:

A cross-sectional, Web-based online questionnaire study was performed among dental students in the basic, preclinical, and clinical phases of their education through an e-survey using Google Forms between November and December 2022. All regular students (2nd–6th year or basic–clinical) at the time the research was conducted were involved. A total of 123 questionnaires were sent to the regular students (the total number of students in the different studying phases). Aside from age and study section, the questionnaire had 3 other parts.

STUDY TOOLS AND DATA COLLECTION:

A 21-item closed-question questionnaire that included the study phase was adopted from previous local [20–24] and global studies [15–18,29] published recently with some modifications. The survey questionnaire was translated into Arabic with the assistance of a native Arabic speaker; later, the forms of questions were exposed to forward and backward translation into English [30,31]. The questionnaire’s validity was judged by a panel of 10 subject-matter experts. Reliability was established by conducting a test–retest among 12 volunteer participants. The kappa value was 0.85, which indicated high reliability. The test–retest was followed by pilot testing among 12 volunteers who were asked to answer the questionnaire and provide feedback on its content, clarity, and brevity. Squared boxes were provided, and students from different study phases had to select a single option for each question. A student could only respond to the questionnaire once, and all questions needed to be answered. The answers were directly documented through Google Forms. Informed consent was asked for in the Google Form, and the questionnaire copies were sent through WhatsApp.

QUESTIONNAIRE PARTS:

An English version of a Web-based, self-administrated survey separated into 3 parts was circulated. The questionnaire comprised a brief clarification of the aim of the study, the process of data gathering, and closed-ended queries. The first part of the questionnaire involved questions about age and study phase (basic, preclinical, clinical). The second part consisted of 14 questions on overall knowledge and awareness of DD. The last part of the questionnaire comprised 5 questions related to the practice of DD. Feedback was entirely anonymous to ensure confidentiality, and a consent form was enclosed with the questionnaire.

STATICAL ANALYSIS:

The collected information was analyzed using the statistical software R version 4.2.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing) and Microsoft Excel. Categorical variables were signified by frequency and ratio. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were used to check the association between categorical variables. P values less than or equal to 0.05 indicated statistical significance.

Results

PARTICIPANTS CHARACTERISTICS:

Out of the 123 questionnaires sent to all students in different study phases, 120 were sent back with answers; the overall response rate was 97%. The number (percentage) of students was 34 (28.3%), 47 (39.2%), and 39 (32.5%) for basic, preclinical, and clinical phases, respectively (Figure 1). The dental students’ ages were 19–24 years, with a mean age and standard deviation of 21.19±3.662 years.

PARTICIPANT’S UNDERSTANDING AND AWARENESS OF DIGITAL DENTISTRY:

Table 1 presents the responses of the students in relation to knowledge and awareness of DD in their school. Two-thirds of the students responded positively to the questions “How skillful are you with computers?” and “Do you have any previous knowledge of DD?” A large percentage of the respondents (32.5%) stated that prosthodontic specialty is the most common among all topics in DD. The questions “How much do you think DD improves work efficiency in the dental laboratory?”, “Has DD replaced traditional dentistry?”, and “Do you think that the widespread implementation of digital technologies will have a negative effect on the number of employees in dental laboratories?” elicited the answers “a lot” and “yes” from 97 (80.8%), 101 (84.2), and 104 (86.7) students, respectively.

The question “Does DD require skills and training?” The response rate for this question was less than for the overall responses (89, 74.2%). “Does DD provide more precise results than conventional dentistry?” Dental ceramic was the most utilized and processed material (71, 59.2%) in dental technology in comparison with other dental materials, followed by polymers (12, 10%) and different alloys and metals (10, 8.3%). Most of the respondents (96, 80%) did not know about 3D DD, and nearly the same number and percentage of respondents were familiar with CAD/CAM technology (Table 1).

UNDERSTANDING OF PARTICIPANTS REGARDING THEIR PRACTICE OF DIGITAL DENTISTRY:

With regard to the practice of DD among the 120 participants, as shown in Table 2, most of the respondents (88, 73.3%) did not practice DD, but most of them (99, 82.5%) said that DD is the future of dentistry. More than half of the participants stated that practicing DD will result in improvements in all factors, such as patient satisfaction, time consumed, and level of predictability.

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN DD AWARENESS AND KNOWLEDGE AND STUDY LEVEL:

Table 3 shows the correlation of the knowledge parameter to DD and students in different study phases. The clinical-phase students recorded the largest numbers and percentages of responses to the questions/statements “Do you have any previous knowledge of DD?” (32, 82.1%), “Prosthodontic specialty is the field that uses DD the most” (15, 38.5%), “Does DD provide more precise results than conventional dentistry?” (39, 100%), and “Ceramic is the most common material that can be processed using DD” (26, 66.7%).

The chi-square test showed significant differences in relation to the questions “Do you have any previous knowledge about DD?”, “The field that uses DD the most is…”, “Does DD provide more precise results than conventional dentistry?”, and “Do you know about CAD/CAM?”, which had P values of 0.006, 0.000, 0.018, and 0.002, respectively (Table 3). Fisher’s exact test showed a significant difference in relation to the questions “Do you think that the widespread implementation of digital technologies will have a negative effect on the number of employees in dental laboratories?” and “What materials can be processed using dental technology?”, which had P values of 0.011 and 0.000, respectively (Table 3).

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PRACTICE OF PARTICIPANTS AND STUDY LEVEL:

In relation to the practice of DD, the chi-square test showed no significant differences in the responses of the students at different study levels to the questions “Do you monitor the development of digital dentistry?”, “Is the digital dentistry the future of dentistry?”, “Do you practice DD?”, “Will the practice of digital dentistry improve related factors”, and “Do you think the quality of patient care will decline when DD is used?”, which had P values of 0.403, 0.126, 0.155, 0.403, and 0.359, respectively (Table 4).

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN DIGITAL DENTISTRY IMPROVEMENT AND CLINICAL PRACTICE AMONG STUDY LEVELS:

The students at different study levels accounted for the highest percentage of the positive responses to the statement that DD results in improvements in patient satisfaction, time consumed, and level of predictability of outcomes, with 61.7%, 50.0%, and 43.6% for preclinical, clinical, and basic students, respectively. Most of them stated that the quality of patient care will decline during the use of DD; the number (percentage) of students who answered “yes,” “to some extent,” and “no” was 28 (23.3%), 46 (38.3%), and 46 (38.3%), respectively (Figure 2). Moreover, with regard to knowledge about DD, most of the students answered that prosthodontics is the field that uses DD the most; the preclinical, clinical, and basic students produced response rates of 40.4%, 38.5%, and 14.7%, respectively. Additionally, the students believed that dental ceramic is the most suitable material to be processed by DD, with response rates of 66.7%, 61.8%, and 51.1% from the clinical, basic, and preclinical students, respectively (Figure 2).

Discussion

Enhancing students’ views about DD from the perspective of dental educators is necessary for students to be involved in DD after graduation. The use of DD throughout dental measures, together with relevant experiences in using recent equipment, good information, and ample training time, can help students develop favorable attitudes toward the use of DD. Doing so might increase the adoption of this technology [20]. The objective of this study was to evaluate the knowledge and practice of dental students at basic, preclinical, and clinical study phases at the College of Dentistry, King Faisal Complex, SA, regarding the application of DD.

The students in this study showed a favorable perception of DD at all study levels (basic, preclinical, and clinical), but the value for the clinical-phase students was slightly higher than those of students in the other phases. The overall results revealed that the students have ample knowledge, and they are ready to use DD in their future practice, although most of them do not practice DD yet. Our overall results vary from those of previous local studies [20,22,23] that showed that students at the clinical level use DD more than basic or preclinical students. This could be possibly because these previous studies compared undergraduate students. This result also disagrees with those of some international studies [16,32] because those studies conducted surveys among dental practitioners and graduate students, whereas the present study was conducted among undergraduate students only.

Since digital simulation systems have previously been involved in dental curricula for undergraduate students in several countries, dental students should have some knowledge and awareness of these technologies, including digital microscopes, virtual pathology slides, digital X-ray images, and DD skill training machines [22]. The most common prosthesis students fabricate via CAD/CAM is single crowns [24]. However, dental schools encounter issues in the integration of DD into their regular curricula [20]. Most of the students (80%) at different study levels in the current study had a high percentage of knowledge about CAD/CAM, and this result is in agreement with those of many previous local studies [20,22] and international studies. For example, a Romanian study conducted by Diaconu-Popa revealed that dental students theoretically know about CAD-CAM [33]. Meanwhile, knowledge of CAD/CAM is limited to preclinical dental students in Pakistan [34], dental students in India [18], and general practitioners in Egypt, where 47.3% of participants have moderate knowledge [29].

In the current study, 63.3% of students had knowledge of DD, and most of them answered positively to the related questions. This result is unsurprising and agrees with those of prior research that identified time as a critical topic for dental program administrators due to the extreme amount of information distributed to students [35]. The students in the current study had a favorable attitude toward DD, a result that agrees with prior research [36,37] on different subjects that used DD during their study. Students are well motivated to gain knowledge about different types of DD and to use DD during their study or in their practice after graduation.

In the current study, with regard to the questions pertaining to DD knowledge, 42.5% said that they knew about DD from media, and only 22.2% found out about DD in college. This finding is in contrast to those of Ibrahim et al and Madfa et al, who reported that 91% of students know about DD in college [20,22] and those of Radwan et al, who reported that most dentists find out about DD from their courses and workshops [23]. This variation is likely due to the fact that these previous studies were conducted on practicing dentists with various specialties. Aldowah et al reported that most (77.6%) AI information accessed by Saudi undergraduate students came from social media [26].

Knowledge of CAD/CAM was slightly higher (72.3%) among students in this study than reported by previous studies of preclinical dental students [34] and from the results of Mhanni et al, who reported that only 35% of undergraduate students have seen a CAD/CAM unit [38]. Diaconu-Popa found that all students have theoretical knowledge about the digital technology CAD/CAM [33]. These results emphasize the importance of sending different messages through different media platforms and the need for conferences and seminars in colleges, cities, and countries.

The current study showed that students think that prosthodontics is the field that uses DD the most, and the specialty that uses DD the least is periodontitis. This finding totally agrees with results recently published by Aldowah et al, reporting 33.9% and 6.7% for the same specialty [26], but disagrees with those of many previous studies [24,39,40] that reported DD is mostly implemented in digital radiography, 2D digital radiography, and cone beam computed tomography, and implemented the least in the digital manufacturing of completely removable dentures. This difference can be explained by the fact that these previous surveys were conducted among general practitioners and graduated dentists who were practicing dentistry in private clinics, whereas the current study was conducted among dental students only.

Students are immersed in DD, so they are characteristically excited about practicing the technology in their forthcoming jobs [41,42]. However, no studies on students’ actual practice of DD have been published in SA. The current study revealed that 52.5% of the participants at the basic, preclinical, and clinical phases stated that using DD improves patient satisfaction by 11.7% and time consumption by 17.5%. This finding varies from that of Madfa et al [22], who found 94.3%. Moreover, practicing DD improves the quality of clinical practice.

Most previous studies were conducted on practicing dentists and intern students, so their practice results are higher than the current results because most of the participants in the current research were basic and preclinical students. The current study also showed that most students think that DD requires skills and training and believe that DD is of better quality than traditional dentistry and could replace the latter. This finding is consistent with results obtained from other colleges in SA [20,22].

The current study found that most students think that DD is the future of dentistry, although only less than one-third of the students practice DD. This situation can be explained by the fact that most of the students are still enrolled in the BDS program. This result does not agree with those of Madfa et al, who reported that most students use DD. Notably, their study included respondents from high study levels, such as preclinical–clinical and interns [22]. With regard to the practice of DD, the present study found no significant differences between students’ levels, and this finding is consistent with those of previous local studies conducted recently on preclinical, clinical, and dental interns [20,22].

Dental students [43] and dentists [44] should utilize DD to improve their educational experience and future career. DD has gained in popularity not only among dental educators but also among behavioral, social, and educational professionals [16,32,33]. In the current study, the students had a favorable attitude about practicing DD at all study levels (basic, preclinical, and clinical), but most of them did not practice DD yet. This result varies from those of other studies [20,22], which showed that almost 87% of dental students use DD. This variation may be explained by the fact that these previous studies were conducted on students at high study levels. Dental students use different types of DD during their training, and emphasizing the value of using DD influences their willingness to use and practice it in the future. Consequently, future attempts to advance DD education should focus on elements associated with students’ behavioral intentions [20].

Overall, DD has advantages in several dental disciplines. Its digital dental workflow contributes to increased safety, reduces the length and number of dental appointments, entails minimally invasive surgical procedures, and decreases the contact between basic and preclinical dental laboratories and clinical practicing subjects. Moreover, as DD develops it may replace some other topics in the curriculum. One of the problems is that students may prefer to connect with DD rather than patients, staff, and colleagues; in this case, their ability to engage patients may diminish. An additional topic of interest is the possible lack of manual dexterity of dental students, which may hinder their ability to conduct dental services using analog methods at the required competency levels [44]. Understanding educational methodologies is critical to maximizing educational effectiveness as learning methods and tools advance [45]. However, dental schools encounter several issues in the integration of DD into their regular curricula [20].

Future narrow-focus, reliable, validated studies that explore the application of certain DD technologies might enhance the current curricula in different BDS programs. Follow-up observational and survey studies are highly recommended to observe the future integration of DD into Saudi dental schools’ curricula and compare SA’s dental schools with other leading dental schools worldwide. In addition, a demonstrative sample of students at different study levels from each local dental school could be used in an investigation to determine the effectiveness of incorporating DD into curricula and measure student satisfaction and confidence in undertaking DD as digital workflow [24].

This study is a first to highlight the importance, knowledge, and practice of digital dentistry among dental college students, and the inclusion of such courses in BDS programs. Further studies in similar dental and other medical fields should be conducted. One of the limitations of this study is that the questionnaire did not include all types of dental technology, such as intraoral scanners and recently developed 3D machines. Moreover, the study examined only 1 dental college, and dental technicians were excluded because they are a basic partner in the field of DD.

Conclusions

The following conclusions were obtained.

References

1. Gonulol N, Kalyoncuoglue E, Education and learning in digital dentistry: J Exper Clin Medicine, 2021; 38(3s); 163-67

2. Schleyer TK, Digital dentistry in the computer age: J Am Dent Assoc, 1999; 130(12); 1713-20

3. Albuha Al-Mussawi RM, Farid F, Computer-based technologies in dentistry: Types and applications: J Dent (Tehran), 2016; 13(3); 215-22

4. Srinivasan M, Schimmel M, Naharro M, CAD/CAM milled removable complete dentures: Time and cost estimation study: J Dent, 2019; 80; 75-79

5. Gupta C, Mittal A, Role of digital technology in prosthodontics: A step toward improving dental care: Indian J Oral Health Res, 2018; 4; 35-41

6. Tordiglione L, De Franco M, Bosetti G, The prosthetic workflow in the digital era: Int J Dent, 2016; 2016; 9823025

7. Tatarciuc M, Diaconu-Popa D, Viţalariu A, Digital dentistry: Med Surg J Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iaşi, 2019; 123(4); 735-38

8. van Noort R, The future of dental devices is digital: Dent Mater, 2012; 28(1); 3-12

9. Schlenz MA, Michel K, Wegner K, Undergraduate dental students’ perspective on the implementation of digital dentistry in the preclinical curriculum: A questionnaire survey: BMC Oral Health, 2020; 20(1); 78

10. Marti AM, Harris BT, Metz MJ, Comparison of digital scanning and polyvinyl siloxane impression techniques by dental students: Instructional efficiency and attitudes towards technology: Eur J Dent Educ, 2017; 21(3); 200-5

11. Marinello C, The digital revolution in prosthodontics: Can it benefit older people?: Gerodontology, 2016; 33(2); 145-46

12. Schwindling FS, Deisenhofer UK, Porsche M, Establishing CAD/CAM in preclinical dental education: Evaluation of a hands-on module: J Dent Educ, 2015; 79(10); 1215-21

13. Mangano F, Shibli JA, Fortin T, Digital dentistry: New materials and techniques: Int J Dent, 2016; 2016; 5261247

14. Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H, Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: Evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes: BMC Oral Health, 2014; 14; 10

15. Tran D, Nesbit M, Petridis H, Survey of UK dentists regarding the use of CAD/CAM technology: Br Dent J, 2016; 221(10); 639-44

16. van der Zande MM, Gorter RC, Bruers JJM, Dentists’ opinions on using digital technologies in dental practice: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 2018; 46(2); 143-53

17. Nayakar R, Sardesai P, Killedar S, Knowledge, awareness and practices of the use of digital technology in dentistry among postgraduate students and dental practitioners in India: A Cross-sectional Study: Journal of Clinical Diagnostic Research, 2022; 16(2); ZC07-12

18. Kumar VSS, Ganesh R, Balakrishnan N, Perception and knowledge about digital dentistry among dental students – a cross-sectional study in Chennai, Tamil Nadu: Int J Prev Public Health Sci, 2016; 2(5); 20-23

19. El Tantawi M, Aly NM, Attia D, Abdelrahman H, Mehaina M, Dentist availability in Egypt: A 20-year study of supply, potential demand and economic factors: East Medit Health J, 2020; 26(9); 1078-86

20. Al-Ibrahim IK, Alharbi SM, Alharbi BB: Knowledge and perception regarding digital dentistry among Saudi dental students, 2022 Available at: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1412842/v1

21. Nassani MZ, Ibraheem S, Shamsy E, A Survey of dentists’ perception of chair-side CAD/CAM technology: Healthcare (Basel), 2021; 9(1); 68

22. Madfa AA, Al-Ibrahim IK, Alshammary FL, An audit of Saudi dental students’ opinions and attitudes toward digital dentistry: Open Dent J, 2023; 17; 1-6

23. Radwan HA, Alsharif AT, Alsharif MT, Digital technologies in dentistry in Saudi Arabia: Perceptions, practices and challenges: Digit Health, 2023; 9; 20552076231197095

24. Alfallaj HA, Afrashtehfar KL, Asiri AK, Almasoud FS, The status of digital dental technology implementation in the Saudi dental schools’ curriculum: A national cross-sectional survey for healthcare digitization: Inter J Enviro Research Public Health, 2022; 20(1); 321

25. Zitzmann NU, Matthisson L, Ohla H, Joda T, Digital undergraduate education in dentistry: A systematic review: Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2020; 17(9); 3269

26. Aldowah O, Almakrami A, Alghuwaynim Y, Perceptions and knowledge of undergraduate dental students about artificial intelligence in dental schools: A cross-sectional study: J Contemp Dent Pract, 2024; 25(2); 148-55

27. Almahdi H, Alnaeem TA, Alshawaf HT, Self-perceived preparedness of KFU dental graduates to practice dentistry: A cross-sectional study: Adv Med Educ Pract, 2023; 14; 595-601

28. World Medical Association, World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects: JAMA, 2013; 310(20); 2191-94

29. Hall MA, Karawia I, Mahmoud AZ, Mohamed OS, Knowledge, awareness, and perception of digital dentistry among Egyptian dentists: A cross-sectional study: BMC Oral Health, 2023; 23(1); 963

30. Syed W, Al-Rawi MBA, Bashatah A, Knowledge of and attitudes toward clinical trials: A questionnaire-based study of 179 male third- and fourth-year PharmD undergraduates from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Med Sci Monit, 2024; 30; e943468

31. Al Moaleem MM, Al Ahmari NM, Alqahtani SM, Unlocking endocrown restoration expertise among dentists: insights from A multi-center cross-sectional study: Med Sci Monit, 2023; 29; e940573

32. Sheba M, Comnick C, Elkerdani T, Students’ perceptions and attitudes about digital dental technology is associated with their intention to use it: J Dent Educ, 2021; 85(8); 1427-34

33. Diaconu-Popa D, Tatarciuc M, Vitalariu A, Study on the students attitude toward digital technology in dentistry: Rom J Med Den Edu, 2019; 8; 47-55

34. Lubna M, Zeeshan A, Muhammad F, Arif A, Knowledge and awareness of digital dentistry among the dental students of Karachi, Pakistan: Cross-sectional study: J Pharmaceutical Research Inter, 2022; 34(44A); 29-39

35. Formicola AJ, Current state of dental education: Executive summary: J Dent Educ, 2017; 81(8); 1008-14

36. Ren Q, Wang Y, Zheng Q, Survey of student attitudes towards digital simulation technologies at a dental school in China: Eur J Dent Educ, 2017; 21(3); 180-86

37. McCready ZR, Jham BC, Dental students’ perceptions of the use of digital microscopy as part of an oral pathology curriculum: J Dent Educ, 2013; 77(12); 1624-28

38. Mhanni A, Al-hmadi S, El-Sawaay S, Awareness among dental undergraduate students regarding CAD/CAM technology in Tripoli Region, Libya: Khalij-Libya J Dent Med Res, 2020; 7(2); 79-87

39. Brownstein SA, Murad A, Hunt RJ, Implementation of new technologies in U.S. dental school curricula: J Dent Educ, 2015; 79(3); 259-64

40. Ishida Y, Kuwajima Y, Kobayashi T, Current implementation of digital dentistry for removable prosthodontics in US dental schools: Int J Dent, 2022; 2022; 7331185

41. Mays KA, Levine E, Dental students’ self assessment of operative preparations using CAD/CAM: A preliminary analysis: J Dent Educ, 2014; 78(12); 1673-80

42. Douglas RD, Hopp CD, Augustin MA, Dental students’ preferences and performance in crown design: Conventional wax-added versus CAD: J Dent Educ, 2014; 78(12); 1663-72

43. Divaris K, Barlow PJ, Chendea SA, The academic environment: The students’ perspective: Eur J Dent Educ, 2008; 12(Suppl 1); 120-30

44. Krastev T, Payer M, Krastev Z, The utilisation of CAD/CAM technology amongst Austrian dentists: A pilot study: Int Dent J, 2023; 73(3); 430-34

45. Cooper LF, Digital technology: Impact and opportunities in dental education: J Dent Educ, 2019; 83(4); 379-80

46. Jackson TH, Zhong J, Phillips C, Koroluk LD, Self-directed digital learning: When do dental students study?: J Dent Educ, 2018; 82(4); 373-78

In Press

Review article  

Long COVID or Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC) and the Urgent Need to Identify Diagnostic...

Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.946512  

0:00

Clinical Research  

Intravenous Lidocaine Response as a Predictor for Oral Oxcarbazepine Efficacy in Neuropathic Pain Syndrome:...

Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.945612  

Review article  

Cariprazine in Psychiatry: A Comprehensive Review of Efficacy, Safety, and Therapeutic Potential

Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.945411  

Clinical Research  

Comparison of Remimazolam and Dexmedetomidine for Sedation in Awake Endotracheal Intubation in Scoliosis Su...

Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.944632  

Most Viewed Current Articles

17 Jan 2024 : Review article   6,053,124

Vaccination Guidelines for Pregnant Women: Addressing COVID-19 and the Omicron Variant

DOI :10.12659/MSM.942799

Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e942799

0:00

14 Dec 2022 : Clinical Research   1,840,708

Prevalence and Variability of Allergen-Specific Immunoglobulin E in Patients with Elevated Tryptase Levels

DOI :10.12659/MSM.937990

Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e937990

0:00

16 May 2023 : Clinical Research   693,001

Electrophysiological Testing for an Auditory Processing Disorder and Reading Performance in 54 School Stude...

DOI :10.12659/MSM.940387

Med Sci Monit 2023; 29:e940387

0:00

07 Jan 2022 : Meta-Analysis   257,439

Efficacy and Safety of Light Therapy as a Home Treatment for Motor and Non-Motor Symptoms of Parkinson Dise...

DOI :10.12659/MSM.935074

Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e935074

Your Privacy

We use cookies to ensure the functionality of our website, to personalize content and advertising, to provide social media features, and to analyze our traffic. If you allow us to do so, we also inform our social media, advertising and analysis partners about your use of our website, You can decise for yourself which categories you you want to deny or allow. Please note that based on your settings not all functionalities of the site are available. View our privacy policy.

Medical Science Monitor eISSN: 1643-3750
Medical Science Monitor eISSN: 1643-3750