Aim There is conflicting evidence concerning the ability of recent graduates to meet the standards required in exodontia to be independent practitioners. In particular, there is a lack of confidence in surgical extractions. This study evaluated Foundation Trainee's confidence levels in their oral surgery experience and the teaching of oral surgery in UK dental schools. Materials and Methods Two separate studies were carried out, and the first was a survey to all foundation trainees in the Yorkshire and Humber Deanary in 2019 which analysed their oral surgery experience and confidence levels. The second study surveyed all Dental Schools in the UK with regard to their contact hours, assessment methods, instruments taught and number of extractions in oral surgery for their undergraduate programmes. Results There was a response rate of 52% for the foundation trainees which showed that they were confident in performing non‐surgical extractions but lacked confidence with surgical extractions. There was a positive correlation between the amount of undergraduate experience and confidence levels in exodontia. The second survey which had a response rate of 71% showed variations in the numbers of hours taught for oral surgery, instruments taught and assessment methods, with the structured clinical operative test used more commonly. On average, 41 non‐surgical extractions were performed by students before graduation and two surgical extractions. Conclusion There is a need to identify how oral surgery teaching can be improved in UK dental schools to ensure that foundation trainees are more confident and competent in both surgical and non‐surgical exodontia. In addition, teaching and assessment methods need to be developed to reflect such requirements.
• E n c o u r a g e s r e f l e c t i o n o n w h a t t h o s e s t a n d a r d s e n t a i l .• S u g g e s t s t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e t e r m s must and should has added confusion rather than clarity. AbstractThe General Dental CouncilÕs Standards for the Dental Team sets out guidance for
Simpson's long working life covered a wide field. The pioneering nature of his work in public health and tropical hygiene involved a number of appointments at home and abroad. He worked in Aberdeen as Medical Officer of Health, in India as Health Officer for Calcutta, and in London he taught as Professor of Hygiene at King's College, becoming one of the founders of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The knowledge and experience gained was useful later when he travelled widely abroad as an adviser. He made tropical hygiene his own speciality and became an authority in the British Empire. William Simpson was born in Glasgow on 27 April 1855. Details of his early life are scanty.' His parents died when he was young, and he was at school in Jersey and a medical student in Aberdeen. The staff at the Medical School included some notable men, including "Barron" William Pirrie, who combined the chair of surgery with a flourishing practice and an arduous daily routine of early-morning writing.2 Simpson graduated in 1876 with "honourable distinction",3 but the next few years are not well documented. There is evidence to suggest that he may have been a medical assistant in a practice in Huddersfield,4 and around 1878 was on the staffof Haydock Lodge Retreat near Newton-le-Willows.5 Simpson then moved to Kent, where he was Medical Officer for St Mary's District of Dover Poor Law Union and public vaccinator, as well as holding an appointment at a convalescent home.6 With an Aberdeen MD and the Cambridge certificate in Sanitary Science (later DPH) he applied for the vacant post of Medical Officer of Health for Aberdeen. Francis Ogston, the City's "first significant M.O.H." had combined his public office from 1862 with an academic chair.7 His pluralism was the subject of a forthright comment by Edwin Chadwick in 1877: "Full five hundred and fifty lives a year are sacrificed even in Aberdeen, by its existing insanitary conditions. I find that a public health officer is appointed with a salary of£50 a year. He has, I am informed, £50 more
Huxley comment that little research is being done on general practitioners' attitudes and practice in the treatment of opiate misusers even though general practitioners are now seeing more drug misusers. 1 According to the authors the last substantial report was by Glanz in 1985. 2 We would like to draw attention to similar studies conducted in Lothian in 1988 and 1993. 3 The 1993 study was a postal survey of the experience of, attitudes toward, and confidence in dealing with drug misusers among general practitioners in Lothian. Questionnaires were sent to all 517 general practitioners (response rate 75%). The study also compared changes in general practitioners' involvement with and confidence in dealing with drug misusers from 1988 to 1993; there was a significant increase in both areas. Davies and Huxley found that 80% of the general practitioners in Greater Manchester prescribed substitute drugs for opiate misusers; we found that 73% of the general practitioners in Lothian prescribed substitute drugs, while only 12% stated that they would not do so. Moreover, 67% of the general practitioners in Lothian had given advice on safer drug use and only 2% stated that they would not give such advice. General practitioners in Lothian, like their colleagues in Greater Manchester, expressed the need for more training in dealing with drug misusers. For example, in Lothian they showed a lack of confidence in the management of drug related aggression and violence in the practice, a problem shared with general practitioners in other areas. 4 Training can help build confidence. A positive similarity between the two studies is that general practitioners in both Greater Manchester and Lothian generally have an understanding approach toward drug misuse.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.