Student Reflections on Prosthodontics Patient Encounters: Reversible and Irreversible Procedures: Following Diagnostic Interactions

David C Johnsen; Mai El Najjar; Sally Roushdy; Franciele Floriani

doi:10.1002/jdd.13956

Conceptualizing the next patient interaction is done intuitively by the master practitioner for every patient encounter. The project analyzes student reflections following interactions with patients involving reversible and irreversible procedures and follows a project analyzing reflections with patients involving diagnoses. The main purpose was for the student to ask key questions of every patient for the rest of their career. A secondary purpose was to analyze patterns of responses.PURPOSEConceptualizing the next patient interaction is done intuitively by the master practitioner for every patient encounter. The project analyzes student reflections following interactions with patients involving reversible and irreversible procedures and follows a project analyzing reflections with patients involving diagnoses. The main purpose was for the student to ask key questions of every patient for the rest of their career. A secondary purpose was to analyze patterns of responses.Forty students in Spring 2024 completed the Prosthodontics exercise mostly with reversible or irreversible procedures with the remainder being for examinations. Four open-ended questions were 1) differentiation from the ideal, 2) desired outcome(s), 3) self-capabilities, and 4) consequences/prognosis.METHODSForty students in Spring 2024 completed the Prosthodontics exercise mostly with reversible or irreversible procedures with the remainder being for examinations. Four open-ended questions were 1) differentiation from the ideal, 2) desired outcome(s), 3) self-capabilities, and 4) consequences/prognosis.Note that, 100% of students responded to all four questions, and over 90% of responses were judged by faculty to be relevant to and appropriate for the theme of each respective question. The authors categorized responses into patterns for each question. The exercise elicited different kinds of thought experiences for students reporting on examinations, reversible procedures, and irreversible procedures. For Questions #1, 2, and 4, for reversible procedures, the focus was more on patient tolerance/acceptance of the appliance. For irreversible procedures, the focus was more on the teeth. Responses were first categorized qualitatively. The difference was statistically significant for Questions #1 and 2. For Question #3, no notable difference was found between reversible and irreversible procedures.RESULTSNote that, 100% of students responded to all four questions, and over 90% of responses were judged by faculty to be relevant to and appropriate for the theme of each respective question. The authors categorized responses into patterns for each question. The exercise elicited different kinds of thought experiences for students reporting on examinations, reversible procedures, and irreversible procedures. For Questions #1, 2, and 4, for reversible procedures, the focus was more on patient tolerance/acceptance of the appliance. For irreversible procedures, the focus was more on the teeth. Responses were first categorized qualitatively. The difference was statistically significant for Questions #1 and 2. For Question #3, no notable difference was found between reversible and irreversible procedures.The main purpose was met by engaging students in reflective responses to the four questions. With little literature on the subject, responses to these questions, tell us how students are learning. The collective intuition of students can be converted into a learning guide (learning guidance). The project follows an emulation model for critical thinking.CONCLUSIONSThe main purpose was met by engaging students in reflective responses to the four questions. With little literature on the subject, responses to these questions, tell us how students are learning. The collective intuition of students can be converted into a learning guide (learning guidance). The project follows an emulation model for critical thinking.

Student Reflections on Prosthodontics Patient Encounters: Reversible and Irreversible Procedures: Following Diagnostic Interactions

Files and links (1)

Abstract

Details

Metrics