The curriculum of the dental faculty at the University of Bergen was revised and a new curriculum was implemented in 2000. The first candidates graduated in 2003. In the new curriculum the theoretical teaching consists of an extended integrated lecture series in prosthodontics and biomaterials. The revised laboratory course includes an increased number of tooth preparations performed on phantom heads solely. Newer types of preparations based on bonding technique, such as ceramic crowns, veneers and inlays, have also been introduced. As a consequence of the reduced time allocated to the course, the amount of dental technical work has been considerably reduced. Demonstrations of practical procedures are video-based. Several theoretical and practical tests are carried out during the course. The purpose of this study was to assess the outcome of the alterations made, by comparing former students' opinions on different aspects of the two curricula. A questionnaire was mailed to the students graduated in 2003 with the new curriculum and graduates in 1997 and 2000 with the 'old' curriculum. The results indicate that the alterations tended to improve the students' evaluations of some aspects of the course. In addition, the new curriculum appeared to be more relevant for the succeeding work in the clinic.

The curriculum of the dental faculty at the University of Bergen, Norway, was revised and a new curriculum implemented in 1998 based on the principles of holistic teaching and patient-centered treatment. The irst candidates graduated in 2003. The change of curricula, experience gained, and lack of an evidence base for holistic teaching justify a general discussion of all relevant aspects associated with this approach. The purpose of this article was to make a contribution towards such a discussion. A PubMed search regarding holistic teaching in dentistry was performed. Of the 211 entries on holistic teaching, few discussed holism in depth; none reported outcome measures comparing old and new curricula. Data collected from students graduating in 2003 (new curriculum) and 2000 (old curriculum) on their satisfaction with the teaching comprise a possible outcome measure. In most respects, using prosthodontics as an example, no differences between the two groups of students were found. Students studying under the new holistic curriculum were less satisied than those studying under the old one regarding the number of available teachers and teachers' feedback on student performance. Both holistic teaching/patient-centered treatment and a more traditional subject-speciic approach have advantages and disadvantages, and neither can be practiced in its pure form for ethical and practical reasons. The quantitative results of this study did not support the hypothesis that holism improved students' satisfaction with the teaching. A wide discussion of holism in dental education is needed, along with outcome measures when curricula are changed.Dr. Berge is Professor,