Assessment of two e‐learning methods teaching undergraduate students cephalometry in orthodontics. (5th January 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ludwig, B.; Bister, D.; Schott, T. C.; Lisson, J. A.; Hourfar, J.
• Is Part Of: European journal of dental education. Volume 20:Number 1(2016:Feb.)
• Page Start: 20
• Page End: 25
• Publication Date: 2015-01-05
• Subjects: e‐learning -- undergraduate students -- cephalometry -- orthodontics; Dentistry -- Study and teaching -- Europe -- Periodicals; Dentistry -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; 617.60071
• DOI: 10.1111/eje.12135
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1396-5883

Abstract

Abstract: Aim: Cephalometry is important for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning and is part of the core curriculum for training dentists. Training involves identifying anatomical landmarks. The aim of this investigation was to assess whether e‐learning improves learning efficiency; a programme specifically designed for this purpose was compared to commercially available software. Methods: Thirty undergraduate students underwent traditional training of cephalometry consisting of lectures and tutorials. Tracing skills were tested immediately afterwards (T0). The students were then randomly allocated to three groups: 10 students served as control (CF); they were asked to improve their skills using the material provided so far. Ten students were given a program specifically designed for this study that was based on a power point presentation (PPT). The last group was given a commercially available program that included teaching elements (SW). The groups were tested at the end the six week training (T1). The test consisted of tracing 30 points on two radiographs and a point score improvement was calculated. The students were interviewed after the second test. Results: Both e‐learning groups improved more than the traditional group. Improvement scores were four for CF; 8.6 for PPT and 2.8 for SW. For PPT all participants improved and the student feedback was the best compared to the other groups. For the other groups some candidates worsened. Conclusions: Blended learning produced better learning outcomes compared to using a traditional teaching method alone. The easy to use Power Point based custom software produced better results than the commercially available software.