Implant education patterns and clinical practice of general dentists in Australia

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to understand trends in dentists' implant training attendance and correlation to treatment provision. Implant-specific oral hygiene instruction coverage in training programs was investigated. Methods: A cross-sectional web-survey of dentists registered in Australia was conducted. Respondents were asked about their background, implant training history and treatment provision. Results were analysed by implant provision characteristics and graduation decade. Results: Three hundred and three responses from general dental practitioners (GDPs) were received and analysed. The highest implant training levels attained post-graduation were postgraduate non-specialist qualification (7.9% of respondents), continuing professional development (CPD) (73.6%) versus none (18.5%), with differences between implant providers and non-providers (P < 0.001), different graduation decades (P < 0.001) and those restoring implants or performing surgery as well (P < 0.001). University-based CPD was attended less than dental association/society or implant company CPD. Non-providers were significantly less likely to recall implant oral hygiene instruction sources (P < 0.001). Most GDPs (74.9%) provided implant services, with younger GDPs beginning earlier after graduation. About 16% of respondents did not provide implants once established career-wise. Conclusions: Dentists might be providing implant treatments increasingly earlier in their careers. Respondents with more training were significantly more likely to perform more complex procedures, while implant training attendance trends varied by graduation decade.

Dental implant maintenance teaching in Australia—A survey of education providers

“…While implant maintenance has been recommended to be covered in undergraduate and specialist training, its inclusion in CPD training and attempts to reach dentists who have little interest in providing implant treatments nor attending implant training should not be neglected. A recent survey of 303 Australian general dentists found that CPD was the highest level of implant training attended by 73.6% of respondents, 18.5% had not attended any formal postgraduate nor CPD implant training and approximately 15% were not involved in providing implant treatments when established in their careers . The latter low‐interest group may also be of significant size in other countries; these dentists will nevertheless have contact with patients with implants and should have basic clinical competencies in diagnostics and maintenance.…”

“…While the scientific evidence for implant maintenance continues to evolve, patients continue to receive implant treatments in the millions annually and practitioners must provide preventive services; surveys of practitioners' clinical preferences in implant maintenance and patient home habits have begun to report on current clinical practice . Two surveys of general dentists and oral health practitioners (dental hygienists, dental therapists, oral health therapists) in Australia showed that the latter group demonstrated a greater preventative focus in managing implant patients and that for 73.6% of GDPs surveyed, continuing professional development (CPD) was their highest level of implant training . The information sources for practitioners in clinical practice and patient home habits are unclear, given the mixed evidence available, and many types of implant dentistry training programmes are available.…”

Virtual versus jaw simulation in Oral implant education: a randomized controlled trial

“…However, the current model is simple; it cannot simulate difficult cases in actual clinical practice. Thus, only the more experienced trainers are likely to perform complex clinical procedures [18]. In this regard, digital treatment and training that employs virtual reality offer a novel direction in training for dental implant surgery.…”

Virtual versus Jaw Simulation in Oral Implant Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…However, the current model is simple; it cannot simulate difficult cases in actual clinical practice. Thus, only the more experienced trainers are likely to perform complex clinical procedures [15]. In this regard, digital treatment and training that employs virtual reality offer a novel direction in training for dental implant surgery.…”