Objectives: The study assessed the effectiveness of an oral health educational and behavioral intervention program in improving the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of refugee families. Methods: This randomized 2-arms, controlled, single site, clinical trial assessed the dental knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to oral health at baseline and three times over the course of the 6 months of the intervention in recent refugee families. Participating families were educated on five topics in oral health in two 1-hour sessions utilizing existing oral health education materials adapted to be linguistically and culturally appropriate for demonstration and instruction. Culturally competent techniques and motivational interviewing styles were also implemented during sessions. Pre/post surveys were used to assess changes to knowledge, attitudes, and behavior among refugee family participants. Results: Out of the 66 families enrolled in the program, 52 (72 percent) completed visits over the course of 6 months. Differences between the intervention and control groups were not significant between baseline and 3 to 6 months later (P > 0.05). Conclusions: A short-term, culturally informed oral health educational and behavioral intervention program did not improve oral health-related knowledge, attitudes, or behaviors in a diverse group of recent refugee families. many cases go untreated, incurring greater risks of developing oral diseases among refugees. 3 Poor oral health has a significant impact on quality of life and overall health outcomes. 4 Untreated oral conditions like dental caries can interfere with everyday activities such as talking, eating, and sleeping. 5 This is especially hard on refugee children as it can hinder academic performance and cognitive development. 6 Several unfortunate circumstances make refugee children highly susceptible to

Objective: The study assessed a preventive outreach educational intervention targeting improvements in dental caries and oral-health-related quality of life in the children of refugee families by comparing pre- and postintervention outcomes. Methods: This randomized controlled clinical trial assessed the outcomes at baseline and three times over six months using the WHO oral health assessment form (DMFT/dmft) and the parent version of the Michigan Oral-Health-Related Quality of Life scale. Children and at least one of their parents/caretakers were educated on oral health topics in two one-hour sessions. Results: Of the 66 enrolled families, 52 (72%) completed the six-month follow-up. DMFT/dmft scores increased significantly in both the control and intervention groups (p < 0.05); differences in the changes in the DMFT/dmft and MOHRQoL-P scores from baseline to the three- and six-month follow-up visits between groups were not significant (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Oral health education programs targeting a diverse group of refugee children and their parents/caregivers single-handedly did not reduce the increased number of caries lesions or improve oral-health-related quality of life.

This Point/Counterpoint discusses the long-argued debate over whether lecture attendance in dental school at the predoctoral level should be required. Current educational practice relies heavily on the delivery of content in a traditional lecture style. Viewpoint 1 asserts that attendance should be required for many reasons, including the positive impact that direct contact of students with faculty members and with each other has on learning outcomes. In lectures, students can more easily focus on subject matter that is often difficult to understand. A counter viewpoint argues that required attendance is not necessary and that student engagement is more important than physical classroom attendance. This viewpoint notes that recent technologies support active learning strategies that better engage student participation, fostering independent learning that is not supported in the traditional large lecture classroom and argues that dental education requires assimilation of complex concepts and applying them to patient care, which passing a test does not ensure. The two positions agree that attendance does not guarantee learning and that, with the surge of information technologies, it is more important than ever to teach students how to learn. At this time, research does not show conclusively if attendance in any type of setting equals improved learning or ability to apply knowledge.

No abstract

No abstract