Can perception of fractured endodontic files benefit 1st degree dental students and dental educators: A questionnaire‐based survey

Abstract

PurposeThis study aimed (i) to assess the perception of dental undergraduate (1st degree dental students) learners about endodontic file separation (EFS) and knowledge of its avoidance, as well as (ii) to aid dental educators in conceptualizing and designing student‐directed courses for better understanding. The rationale of this study was to provide both learners and educators with a tool to help self‐assess/impart knowledge and devise simple yet innovative modern ways of teaching in the field of endodontics. The study utilized a self‐reporting dataset from one institution to disclose this limitation.MaterialsA validated self‐administered questionnaire from a previous study was converted into an online Google form link consisting of 15 multiple‐choice questions. This was distributed to 100 Year 4 and Year 5 1st degree dental students. Pearson chi‐square test was used for statistical analysis (p < 0.05).ResultsThe response rate was 81%. The majority of the learners expressed that performing endodontic treatment in permanent (100%) posterior teeth of old‐aged people causes EFS (95.1%). Ninety‐nine percent answered that EFS was a gender‐independent factor, 72.8% perceived that patient anxiety leads to EFS, and 88.9% said that the apical third was more prone to instrument fracture and had the poorest prognosis (95.1%). Hundred percent, 93.8%, 100%, 92.6%, 100%, and 97.5% of respondents, respectively, perceived that the role of operator, coronal flare, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) gel, cleaning endodontic instrument, reusing instrument, and choice of instrument affects the occurrence of EFS. A total of 71.6% said hand files fractured, while 86.4% perceived that stainless steel alloy files separated easily, and 69.1% of learners perceived that EFS occurred often during the cleaning and shaping stage.ConclusionsThe perception of 1st degree dental students regarding EFS and knowledge of its avoidance was good. Results from this study confirmed that the 1st degree dental students’ clinical training courses and study modules adopted and designed by their dental educators were well‐suited and appropriate.