Reshaping dental faculty development using collective healthcare experiences.

Dental academics provide a fulfilling career path to educate the next generation of oral health professionals. The number of dentists choosing a career in dental academics is declining and existing faculty are opting for other career options. As the number of dental schools increase across the US, a critical shortage of educators may be evidenced. In dentistry, innovative approaches to develop academic faculty are not keeping pace with the growing needs of dental faculty, who are challenged to establish a fulfilling work-life balance. This work reviews existing methods that other health professions implement to develop faculty for successful career growth. This review highlights factors and related cofactors that influence career development among dental faculty. Recommendations are presented as potential solutions based on the assessment of similar experiences published by related academic healthcare professions. Dental academia must increase attention to faculty needs and awareness by conducting institutional-specific studies to address these issues with customizable solutions.

Factors affecting pre-doctoral dental students' selection of advanced dental education: A cross-sectional study.

CONTEXT: Understanding the motivators and obstacles behind pursuing advanced dental education is essential in planning pedagogy, mentorship programs, and curricula that support dental students to achieve their future career goals. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate factors influencing dental student's choice to pursue a postgraduate specialization at University of New England College of Dental Medicine with a focus on student personality. Factors examined include demographics, religious affiliations, prior education, dental experiences, expected debt, past career choices, beliefs about the process of specialization, and personality types. METHOD: A total of 232 dental students (91.6% response rate) completed a self-administered questionnaire. About 21.6% of dental students intended to pursue a dental specialty while 38.8% wanted to pursue a nondental Masters' program. Approximately one-third of dental students were interested in practicing as general dentists or pursuing additional training in general dentistry. Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry were the top choices for dental specialization. RESULTS: Being younger, having a dentist family member, nonwhite ethnicity, and having Extraverted and Sensing personality were found to be significant predictors of dental students' intention to pursue advanced dental education. Having a unique talent or skills, past exposure to dental treatments, family/peer expectations, geographic location of the residency program and its proximity to the family were the most identified factors while considering residency program. CONCLUSION: Results in this study are consistent with previous literature and bring attention to the importance of understanding students' personality in teaching methodologies, mentorship and determining their future goals. The findings allow dental institutions to better prepare their predoctoral candidate for residency.

Retrospective study to identify associations between clinician training and dental implant outcome and to compare the use of MATLAB with SAS.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify any associations between predictor variables, mainly clinician training and dental implant outcome, among the residents in different departments and to compare statistical analysis with the use of MATLAB R2017a™ to SAS version 9.4. METHODS: Dental records were reviewed from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2015. Two thousand forty-eight dental implants were placed on 471 patients seen by residents from the departments of Periodontics, Prosthodontics, and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center School of Dentistry. The following parameters were investigated by means of multilevel logistic regression analysis: demographics, implant parameters, department, and residents' year of training. RESULTS: A total of 1449 implants were included in the study. Overall, within a 1-5-year time period, 1343 (92.6%) implants had survived and 106 (7.4%) implants failed. Discipline (p = 0.0004), residents' year of training (p < 0.0001), and implant systems (p = 0.0024) showed significant associations with implant outcome. Periodontics had a survival rate of 94.14% followed by Prosthodontics (91.48%) and OMFS (89.64%). The survival rates of implants by year of training were as follows: third-year Periodontics and OMFS (94.20%), second-year (89.38%), and first-year (88.6%). CONCLUSION: The level and type of clinician training had an impact on implant outcome in different residency programs. Further studies will be necessary to identify the reasons for the differences in implant failure rates.