A Four‐Tier Problem‐Solving Scaffold to Teach Pain Management in Dental School

Abstract

Pain constitutes a major reason patients pursue dental treatment. This article presents a novel curriculum to provide dental students comprehensive training in the management of pain. The curriculum's four-tier scaffold combines traditional and problem-based learning to improve students' diagnostic, pharmacotherapeutic, and assessment skills to optimize decision making when treating pain. Tier 1 provides underpinning knowledge of pain mechanisms with traditional and contextualized instruction by integrating clinical correlations and studying worked cases that stimulate clinical thinking. Tier 2 develops critical decision making skills through self-directed learning and actively solving problem-based cases. Tier 3 exposes students to management approaches taken in allied health ields and cultivates interdisciplinary communication skills. Tier 4 provides a "knowledge and experience synthesis" by rotating students through community pain clinics to practice their assessment skills. This combined teaching approach aims to increase critical thinking and problem-solving skills to assist dental graduates in better management of pain throughout their careers. Dental curricula that have moved to comprehensive care/private practice models are well-suited for this educational approach. The goal of this article is to encourage dental schools to integrate pain management into their curricula, to develop pain management curriculum resources for dental students, and to provide leadership for change in pain management education.

Dental Students’ Learning Experiences and Preferences Regarding Orofacial Pain: A Cross‐Sectional Study

“…Traditionally, OFP has been taught through lectures, seminars, case studies, and labs 9 , 39 . Recently, educators have suggested a change to mixed formats, adding methods such as e‐learning, 40 standardized patients, 41 , 42 elective clinical courses, 43 and small‐group learning or PBL 41 , 44 . Despite one report that students who experienced a PBL curriculum felt more prepared to manage chronic pain than students trained in a traditional way, 37 PBL is used in only 41.9% of OFP curricula in the United Kingdom 9 .…”

“…Despite one report that students who experienced a PBL curriculum felt more prepared to manage chronic pain than students trained in a traditional way, 37 PBL is used in only 41.9% of OFP curricula in the United Kingdom 9 . The effectiveness of mixed methods in teaching OFP is still to be assessed 44 …”

Incidence of Sleep Disorders Reported by Patients at UTHSC College of Dentistry: A Two‐Year Follow‐Up and Proposed Educational Program

“…The program's four‐tier scaffold would combine traditional and problem‐based learning (PBL) to improve students’ diagnostic and assessment skills to optimize decision making for OSA patients 29 – 31 . Tier 1 provides underpinning knowledge of OSA mechanisms with traditional and contextualized instruction by integrating clinical correlations and studying worked cases that stimulate clinical thinking.…”

“…The goal of this educational program is to enable students to screen for OSA better and participate as functional members of a multidisciplinary team that can jointly diagnose and treatment plan OSA patients with sleep medicine specialists. The model integrates both worked and unsolved PBL case scenarios 29 – 31 and includes multidisciplinary participation to increase critical thinking and problem‐solving skills. With small‐group discussions led by instructors in each of the relevant basic science courses, the students first study worked cases that correlate information to clinical scenarios 30 .…”

“…A PBL sleep medicine dentistry workshop would then be offered during summer orientation before students enter the clinic in the third year (Phase II). This PBL experience would be student‐centered learning in which small groups of students are guided by facilitators to resolve problems in OSA management that form the basis for organized focus and stimulus for learning 29 . (See sample cases in Table 3.…”