Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Aug;26(3):435-445.
doi: 10.1111/eje.12718. Epub 2021 Oct 3.

3-Dimensional simulations and student learning in orthodontic education

Angus Cheuk Hin Ho  1 , Chongshan Liao  1   2 , Jiajing Lu  1   3 , Zhiyi Shan  1 , Min Gu  1 , Susan M Bridges  4 , Yanqi Yang  1
Affiliations

3-Dimensional simulations and student learning in orthodontic education

Angus Cheuk Hin Ho et al. Eur J Dent Educ. 2022 Aug.

Abstract

Introduction: The electronic dental model (e-model) is an example of a digital 3-dimensional technology to support inquiry-based learning in undergraduate dental education. As student perceptions of and engagement with e-models vary, it is uncertain whether these perceptions have implications for their learning processes and outcomes.

Materials and methods: Third-year dental students (N = 40) completed a questionnaire to identify their perceptions of and preferences for model modalities. They were divided into three groups based on their preference: Preferring plaster models (Group 1); Preferring e-models (Group 2); No preference (Group 3). Students from three groups (N = 9) attended a hands-on digital occlusion evaluation workshop, and then completed a case-based diagnostic evaluation test using digital occlusion evaluation software. Camtasia Studio™ recorded real-time and on-screen data of the number of mouse-clicks and time spent.

Results: Students reported positive feedbacks on the use of e-models, and 72.5% of the students preferred combination use of e-models and plaster models. After attending the hands-on digital dental occlusion evaluation workshop, Group 2 scored higher on the diagnostic evaluation test (p < .05) and registered more mouse-clicks than Group 1 when evaluating the arch symmetry (p < .05). Group 2 registered fewer mouse-clicks than Group 3 during tooth size measurement (p < .05). There was no significant difference regarding the time used to answer the knowledge questions amongst the three groups.

Conclusion: Undergraduate dental students indicated a generally high acceptance of e-models for their learning in orthodontics, and more prefer a blended approach. Students preferring e-models presented higher performance outcomes, which supports cognitive load theory regarding prior exposure to simulation-based environments.

Keywords: E-learning; blended learning; case-based learning; electronic dental models; orthodontic education; simulation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all of us. We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property. In so doing we confirm that we have followed the regulations of our institutions concerning intellectual property.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Overall scores on orthodontic diagnostic evaluation test in three groups (*p < .05) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
The number of mouse‐clicks of the 3 groups during the evaluation of arch symmetry and tooth size (*p < .05) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
The total time spent in answering the questions in the orthodontic diagnostic evaluation test for each student in three groups
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bleed R. A hybrid campus for the new millennium. EDUCAUSE Rev. 2001;36(1):16‐22.
    1. Garnham C, Kaleta R. Introduction to hybrid courses. Teach Technol Today. 2002;8(6).5.
    1. Smithenry DW. Teaching with crystal structures: helping students recognize and classify the smallest repeating particle in a given substance. Sci Teach. 2009;76(6):52.
    1. Jang S. From Vesalius to Virtual Reality: How Embodied Cognition Facilitates the Visualization of Anatomy. ProQuest LLC; 2010.
    1. Krueger TJ, Barr RE. The concurrent engineering design paradigm is now fully functional for graphics education. Eng Des Graph J. 2009;71(1).22–28.