Background A successful periodontitis treatment demands good manual skills. A correlation between biological sex and dental students’ manual dexterity is currently unknown. Objective This study examines performance differences between male and female students within subgingival debridement. Methods A total of 75 third-year dental students were divided by biological sex (male/female) and randomly assigned to one of two work methods (manual curettes n=38; power-driven instruments n=37). Students were trained on periodontitis models for 25 minutes daily over 10 days using the assigned manual or power-driven instrument. Practical training included subgingival debridement of all tooth types on phantom heads. Practical exams were performed after the training session (T1) and after 6 months (T2), and comprised subgingival debridement of four teeth within 20 minutes. The percentage of debrided root surface was assessed and statistically analyzed using a linear mixed-effects regression model (P<.05). Results The analysis is based on 68 students (both groups n=34). The percentage of cleaned surfaces was not significantly different (P=.40) between male (mean 81.6%, SD 18.2%) and female (mean 76.3%, SD 21.1%) students, irrespective of the instrument used. The use of power-driven instruments (mean 81.3%, SD 20.5%) led to significantly better results than the use of manual curettes (mean 75.4%, SD 19.4%; P=.02), and the overall performance decreased over time (T1: mean 84.5%, SD 17.5%; T2: mean 72.3%, SD 20.8%; P<.001). Conclusions Female and male students performed equally well in subgingival debridement. Therefore, sex-differentiated teaching methods are not necessary.

BACKGROUND A successful periodontitis treatment demands good manual skills. A correlation between biological sex and dental students’ manual dexterity is currently unknown. OBJECTIVE This study examines performance differences between male and female students within subgingival debridement. METHODS A total of 75 third-year dental students were divided by biological sex (male/female) and randomly assigned to one of two work methods (manual curettes n=38; power-driven instruments n=37). Students were trained on periodontitis models for 25 minutes daily over 10 days using the assigned manual or power-driven instrument. Practical training included subgingival debridement of all tooth types on phantom heads. Practical exams were performed after the training session (T1) and after 6 months (T2), and comprised subgingival debridement of four teeth within 20 minutes. The percentage of debrided root surface was assessed and statistically analyzed using a linear mixed-effects regression model (<i>P</i>&lt;.05). RESULTS The analysis is based on 68 students (both groups n=34). The percentage of cleaned surfaces was not significantly different (<i>P</i>=.40) between male (mean 81.6%, SD 18.2%) and female (mean 76.3%, SD 21.1%) students, irrespective of the instrument used. The use of power-driven instruments (mean 81.3%, SD 20.5%) led to significantly better results than the use of manual curettes (mean 75.4%, SD 19.4%; <i>P</i>=.02), and the overall performance decreased over time (T1: mean 84.5%, SD 17.5%; T2: mean 72.3%, SD 20.8%; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). CONCLUSIONS Female and male students performed equally well in subgingival debridement. Therefore, sex-differentiated teaching methods are not necessary.