During the 2004 annual meeting of the International Association for Dental Research, the Education Research Group held a symposium on dental outreach teaching. After a brief introduction, which reviews relevant aspects of the relatively sparse literature, this paper summarises the proceedings, the themes and conclusions that emerged and the research issues that were identified. It aims to describe aspects of current practice around the world and to promote future discussion. Presenters gave details of outreach programmes for dental undergraduates in Australia, Finland, Malaysia (and Southeast Asia), the United Kingdom and the United States. From these presentations four themes emerged. They were: reasons for the introduction of outreach teaching, its perceived beneficial effects, organisational issues, educational issues. The reasons included a recognition of the need to educate dental undergraduates as members of 'care teams' in the environments and communities where they were ultimately like to work and the current shortage of both suitable patients and teachers (faculty) in many dental schools. A wide range of potential benefits and some disadvantages were identified. The organisational issues were, in the main, seen to relate to finance and administration. The educational issues included the need to train and monitor the performance of teachers at outreach clinics and to assess the performance of the undergraduates whilst at the outreach locations. It was concluded that new technology made it easier to teach at a distance and it was possible to create a dental 'school without walls'. It was recognised that few evaluations of dental outreach teaching have been carried out and that there were many research questions to be answered, including: whether it should be a voluntary or compulsory part of the undergraduate curriculum, how long it should last and what type of outcomes should be assessed.

In 1994, the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-New Jersey Dental School (UMDNJ-NJDS) launched the Community-Oriented Dental Education (CODE) program. The CODE program provides senior dental students the opportunity to spend four days per week providing dental care in a community-based clinic. A survey of graduates of CODE (n=55) and randomly selected graduates of the traditional curriculum (n=110) was conducted via mail to determine attitudes relating to community service (CS), community-based learning (CBL), reasons for participating in their clinical program, perceived levels of clinical preparedness at graduation, and practice choices. A total of 111 surveys (66.9 percent) were returned to NJDS, with 84.6 percent of CODE alumni responding and 59.0 percent of traditional alumni (TA) responding. Of the 111 surveys returned, sixty-five (58.6 percent) were completed by TA, and forty-six (41.4 percent) were completed by CODE alumni. There were no differences among CODE and TA regarding attitudes toward CS and tendency to practice in underserved areas or to accept Medicaid payments. There were, however, some differences in attitudes toward CBL, reasons for applying or not applying to the CODE program, perceived impact of clinical education on graduates' preparedness, views of the extent to which the programs encouraged students to choose public or private areas of practice, and perceptions of how the desire to help communities influenced career and practice decisions. Some of these findings may be useful to schools as they plan extramural education programs.

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) can be envisaged as a circular process of goal-setting, followed by external and internal evaluations resulting in improvements that can serve as goals for a next cycle. The need for CQI is apparent, because of public accountability, maintaining European standards and the improvement of dental education. Many examples are known where recommendations from both external and internal evaluation are used for the improvement of dental education. Unfortunately, the implementation of the recommendations is inconsistent, rarely systematic and usually not transparent. This section agreed that it is essential to apply CQI in a structured, systematic and transparent way if we are to improve and maintain the quality of dental education. A model is proposed which includes three aspects: a) the process of CQI; b) the subjects to which CQI should be applied; and c) the management tools to govern CQI. It is stressed, that CQI is a process that can be applied in any dental school irrespective of curriculum or educational approach within the relevant context of the country or the region. The approach needs to recognize the complexity and the need to balance a quality improvement with accountability. A CQI system is also constrained in any organization by the attitudes and values of the staff. Inevitably there has to be a wide range in the application of CQI. Nevertheless, an agreed model on CQI might enhance convergence towards higher standards of dental education. The process of CQI can be supported by developments in information and communication technology (ICT): collection of data, identifying the steps in CQI, formats of reports, etc. The section was set, as one of its tasks, to advise on the development of a network based on a number of case studies on the application of CQI in dental education.

Interprofessional collaborative care (IPC) is defined as working within and across healthcare disciplines and is considered essential to achieve a more inclusive, patient-centred care, provide a means to support patient safety and address global healthcare provider shortages. Interprofessional education (IPE) provides the knowledge and experience students need to achieve these goals. ADEE/ADEA held a joint international meeting 8-9 May 2017, with IPE being one of four topic areas discussed. The highly interactive workshop format, where "everyone was an expert," supported discussion, sharing and creative problem-solving of over seventy-one participants from twenty-nine countries. IPE participants broke out into five groups over a two-day period discussing three main areas: challenges and barriers to implementing IPE within their institution or country; discussion of successful models of introducing and assessing IPE initiatives, and exploring best practices and next steps for implementation for each group member. A mind-mapping model was used to graphically display participants' thoughts and suggestions. Key themes, revealed through the visual mind maps and discussion, included the following: IPE should lead to and enhance patient-centred care; student involvement is key to IPE success; faculty development and incentives can facilitate adoption and implementation of IPE; the role of a "champion" and leadership structure and commitment is important to move IPE forward; and IPE must be tailored to the unique issues found in each country. Overall, there was a high level of interest to continue both collaboration and discussion to learn from others beyond the London meeting.

Coordination of medical and dental treatment might improve health and reduce costs if targeted to high user populations. Health-care delivery reforms, such as accountable care organizations, could provide vehicles for achieving this coordination. Important challenges include fragmentation of ED visits across hospitals, adequacy of dentist supply, and broader reliance on the ED for health problems.