Background Dental practitioners and dental students are classified as high-risk exposure to COVID-19 due to the nature of dental treatments, but evidence of their acceptance towards COVID-19 vaccination is still scarce. Hence, this systemic review aims to critically appraise and analyse the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccination among dental students and dental practitioners. Materials and methods This review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021286108) based on PRISMA guidelines. Cross-sectional articles on the dental students’ and dental practitioners’ acceptance towards COVID-19 vaccine published between March 2020 to October 2021 were searched in eight online databases. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was employed to analyse the risk of bias (RoB) of each article, whereas the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine recommendation tool was used to evaluate the level of evidence. Data were analysed using the DerSimonian-Laird random effect model based on a single-arm approach. Results Ten studies were included of which three studies focused on dental students and seven studies focused on dental practitioners. Four studies were deemed to exhibit moderate RoB and the remaining showed low RoB. All the studies demonstrated Level 3 evidence. Single-arm meta-analysis revealed that dental practitioners had a high level of vaccination acceptance (81.1%) than dental students (60.5%). A substantial data heterogeneity was observed with the overall I2 ranging from 73.65% and 96.86%. Furthermore, subgroup analysis indicated that dental practitioners from the Middle East and high-income countries showed greater (p < 0.05) acceptance levels, while meta-regression showed that the sample size of each study had no bearing on the degree of data heterogeneity. Conclusions Despite the high degree of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among dental practitioners, dental students still demonstrated poor acceptance. These findings highlighted that evidence-based planning with effective approaches is warranted to enhance the knowledge and eradicate vaccination hesitancy, particularly among dental students.

Background and Objectives: This systemic review aims to appraise and analyse the awareness, knowledge, attitude, and practice of teledentistry among dental practitioners during COVID-19. Materials and Methods: This review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021283404). Cross-sectional articles on dental practitioners’ perceptions towards teledentistry published between March 2020 and September 2021 were searched in ten online databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane, EMBASE, SIGLE, EBSCO, LILACS, and Open Grey). The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was employed to analyse the risk of bias (RoB) of each article, whereas the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine recommendation tool was used to evaluate the level of evidence. Data were analysed using the DerSimonian–Laird random effect model based on a single-arm approach. Results: Six studies were included and demonstrated Level 3 evidence. A single-arm meta-analysis revealed that dental practitioners had a high level of awareness (70.4%) and attitude (72.5%) towards teledentistry during the COVID-19 pandemic, but their knowledge level (57.9%) was moderate with a poor practice level (35.8%). A substantial heterogeneity was observed with the overall I2 ranging from 90.78% to 98.21%. Furthermore, meta-regression indicated that the sample size of each study had a significant (p < 0.05) impact on the degree of data heterogeneity. Conclusions: Despite their high degree of awareness and attitude, dental practitioners demonstrated moderate knowledge and relatively poor practice of teledentistry during the COVID-19 pandemic. More well-designed studies are warranted to investigate the alternatives for enhancing dental practitioners’ knowledge and practice of teledentistry interventions.

The current study aimed to explore the perceptions of high-performing undergraduate dental students in learning dental materials science. One-on-one semi-structured interviews with high-performing students who scored 80 marks and above in dental materials were conducted using an online video-chat platform. A purposeful sampling method was employed, and six students fulfilled the criteria. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed qualitatively using a thematic approach. Three major themes were identified: (1) Learning strategies, (2) Learning enablers and barriers, and (3) Coping with learning challenges. Six sub-themes emerged from the “learning strategies” theme: memorizing and repeating, peer learning, seeking learning resources, study planning, paying attention during class, and mnemonics. The enabler sub-themes include motivation, lecture notes, teachers, and hands-on, whereas the barrier sub-theme is content understanding. Moreover, family support and de-stress appeared as the sub-themes in coping with learning challenges. In short, the present exploratory study identified several major themes and sub-themes that can help dental educators comprehend the complexity of learning dental materials science and how it affects students’ academic performances. The current findings also offer learning recommendations for low-performing students to improve their academic achievements in the dental materials science course.

Dental materials science education is frequently delivered via traditional didactic lectures in preclinical dental programs. This review aimed to appraise the current evidence on innovative pedagogical strategies in teaching dental materials science courses. English-language articles on teaching methods for dental materials science published between January 1990 to October 2022 were searched in nine online databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science [WoS], Science Direct, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, LILACS, Open Grey, and EMBASE) according to PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 and ROBIN-I tools, whereas the level of evidence was determined based on the OCEBM guidelines. Only 12 primary studies were included. Two randomized studies (RCTs) were deemed as being of “some concern,” and one showed a high risk of bias (RoB). Three non-randomized controlled studies (NRS) demonstrated a moderate RoB, whereas the remaining seven were low. Most studies were ranked at Levels 2 and 3 of evidence. Several innovative pedagogical strategies were identified: flipped classrooms, clinical-based learning, computer-assisted learning, group discussion, microteaching with the BOPPPS (bridge-in, learning objective, pre-test, participatory learning, post-test, and summary) model, and game-based learning. The evidence suggested that students generally showed positive perceptions toward these pedagogical strategies. Dental educators should revise their current undergraduate dental materials science curricula and integrate more effective teaching methods.

Background To assess the quality of endodontic record-keeping and root canal obturation performed by undergraduate final year dental students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods Dental records and dental radiographs of patients who received endodontic treatments between March 2020 and March 2022 by undergraduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. The audit data were collected based on the European Society of Endodontology guidelines retrospectively via assessing the patient’s clinical records and intraoral periapical radiograph. Root canal obturation quality was evaluated based on the following parameters: adaptation, length, taper, and mishap. A root filling is defined as satisfactory only when all four parameters were graded as acceptable. Subsequently, the data were recorded and analysed using Chi-Square test with the level of significance set at p = 0.05. Results A total of 111 patient records with 111 root canal-treated teeth were evaluated. The highest percentage of documented evidence was noted in the patient’s general records, while the endodontic treatment records showed the lowest percentage of documented evidence. 78 (70.3%) of root canal-treated teeth were deemed satisfactory with acceptable adaptation, length, taper, and absence of mishap. Moreover, no statistical significance in terms of root canal filling quality was noted between anterior and posterior teeth, and between maxillary and mandibular arch. Conclusions Although patient records and root canal fillings quality were deemed satisfactory in most cases, strict documentation requirements and continuing dental education in audit training are necessary for quality assurance.