Purpose To characterize methods, timing, faculty training, and barriers pertaining to curricular integration in preparation for the Integrated National Board Dental Examination (INBDE) at U.S. dental schools Methods Academic deans at 67 U.S. dental schools were emailed an online survey consisting of questions on the time frame and methods of curricular integration, faculty training, and barriers to curricular integration Results Approximately 86% of schools have implemented (∼39%) or will implement (∼61%) changes in curriculum in preparation for the INBDE. Curricular integration was completed in 3‐4 years in most schools, with those schools with larger class sizes taking longer. While 56% of respondents reported avoiding a complete curricular overhaul, 79% reported course sequencing changes, adding, subtracting, or combining courses, and making some changes in existing courses. Curriculum committees had the most input in curricular changes, while individual instructors had the least influence. Sixty seven percent of respondents reported faculty being trained to teach in an integrated curriculum. Problem/case‐based learning and clinical case presentations are being used more for incorporation of biomedical sciences in clinical curriculum; use of clinical examples was the most used mechanism to integrate clinical information in biomedical sciences curriculum. Eighty two percent of respondents indicated that lack of faculty time to prepare courses as the primary barrier for implementing an integrated curriculum. Conclusions Our results show that most U.S. dental schools are implementing integrated teaching models to prepare their students for the INBDE. However, lack of faculty time and training need to be addressed for more successful curricular integration.

PurposeTo compare dental students’ preparedness in clinical periodontal education following their participation in a discipline‐based predoctoral periodontics clinic with dental students that received a general practice‐based periodontal education.Methods114 third‐year dental students and 112 fourth‐year dental students at the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio, were emailed an online survey consisting of questions on their proficiency and confidence levels in diagnosing periodontal diseases and conditions, treatment planning, performing non‐surgical periodontal treatment, identifying the need for referral, and their perceived impediments on their clinical periodontics education.ResultsApproximately 97% of third‐year dental students that participated in discipline‐based predoctoral periodontics agree that they are overall confident in providing excellent periodontal care to their patients, and 91% of these students feel that their participation in the predoctoral periodontics clinic has enhanced their knowledge in periodontics as well as their confidence level when providing periodontal patient care. While 95% of fourth‐year dental students agree that they feel confident in providing excellent periodontal care to their patients, only 83% felt that level of confidence during their third‐year in dental school, and 77% believe that given the option to participate in the pre‐doctoral periodontics clinic, their periodontal education would have been strengthened.ConclusionsOur results show that the integration of a discipline based predoctoral periodontics clinic has benefited the dental students and boosted their knowledge and confidence in diagnosing and treating periodontal patients. This model can be improved by addressing space and time limitations.

Introducing a recall clinic within the dental curriculum.