A global perspective on implant education: Cluster analysis of the "first dental implant experience" of dentists from 84 nationalities. (15th February 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Dragan, Irina F.; Pirc, Miha; Rizea, Cristina; Yao, Jie; Acharya, Aneesha; Mattheos, Nikos
• Is Part Of: European journal of dental education. Volume 23:Number 3(2019)
• Page Start: 251
• Page End: 265
• Publication Date: 2019-02-15
• Subjects: continuing education -- dental -- dental implants -- education -- graduate -- surveys and questionnaires; Dentistry -- Study and teaching -- Europe -- Periodicals; Dentistry -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; 617.60071
• DOI: 10.1111/eje.12426
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1396-5883

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: The aim of this cross‐sectional study was to explore the demographic and educational patterns related to the dentists' first implant dental experience. Material and methods: Participants of a Massive Open Online Course in implant dentistry who have placed and restored implants completed a 25‐item online questionnaire investigating their pathway of education and assessing their experience with the "first implant placement." Exploratory analysis included hierarchical clustering using 9 demographic categorical factors. Results: A total of 1015 respondents from 84 countries formed 5 distinct clusters. Age and work experience were dominant clustering traits, decreasing from Cluster 1 to Cluster 5. Clusters 1 and 3 represented "senior" and "younger" general dental practitioners, respectively, whilst Clusters 2 and 4 represented post‐graduate educated clinicians. Cluster 5 represented recent graduates. Asia, South America and Africa were over‐represented in "younger" clusters. Time in practice was a significant determinant of attitudes, followed by completion of post‐graduate education. There were significant differences in reported patterns of challenges and complications depending on dentists' time in practice, age and post‐graduate education. Challenge in implant positioning was more frequently identified by "young post‐graduate" educated dentists. Recent graduates reported having the fewest complications of all clusters. Obtaining implant education in University settings was most frequently recommended by clusters of dentists with post‐graduate education. Conclusions: Time in practice is a parameter to be considered when designing implant education. The absence of structured education and mentorship might lead to inability to properly assess treatment outcomes and identify complications. Quality‐assured and practice‐directed education is needed at a global level, to support in particular, recent graduates who now seem to engage with implant dentistry early in their career.