Survey of implant training in oral and maxillofacial surgery residency programs in the United States

Abstract

Purpose: The status of implant training in US oral and maxillofacial surgery programs has been reported previously based on data gathered from residency program directors. Since the time of those earlier surveys, however, many new technological and surgical developments have occurred in implant therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current status of implant training in oral and maxillofacial surgery residency programs in the United States.

Materials and methods: E-mail invitations were sent to 559 resident members of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons asking them to participate in an online survey between January 23 and February 6, 2006. Each survey invitation was assigned a unique URL so that each resident could respond only once to the survey during the specified interval. The survey contained 17 questions assessing various aspects of training in implant placement.

Results: A total of 201 completed surveys were received by the specified deadline. The participation rate was roughly similar in residents of 4-year certificate programs and those of 6-year MD combined programs (56% vs 44%). In total, 48% of residents reported receiving less than 20 hours of didactic training in implantology per year, and 57% reported using 2 or fewer implant systems. Some 57% estimated that they would place fewer than 20 implants in the coming year, whereas 52% reported that they would place more than 50 implants during their residency. Interestingly, 98% of the residents reported that implant dentistry would be an important part of their practice, but 28% felt inadequately prepared by residency training.

Conclusions: There is a broad range of experience in implant training in US oral and maxillofacial surgery residency programs. Almost all oral and maxillofacial surgery residents feel that implant dentistry will be an important part of their practice; however, many residents feel that their training during residency has not adequately prepared them for implant surgery. Our findings identify a potential need for additional training in implant surgery during oral and maxillofacial surgery residency.