Teaching Implant Dentistry in the Predoctoral Curriculum: A Report from the ADEA Implant Workshop's Survey of Deans

Abstract

In 2004, a survey of the deans of U.S. and Canadian dental schools was conducted to determine the implant dentistry curriculum structure and the extent of incorporating implant dentistry clinical treatment into predoctoral programs. The questionnaire was mailed to the deans of the fifty-six dental schools in advance of the ADEA Implant Workshop conference held in Arizona in November 2004. Out of the fifty-six, thirty-nine responded, yielding a response rate of 70 percent. Thirty-eight schools (97 percent) reported that their students received didactic instruction in dental implants, while one school (3 percent) said that its students did not. Thirty schools (86 percent) reported that their students received clinical experience, while five schools (14 percent) reported that theirs did not. Four schools (10 percent) did not respond to this question. Fifty-one percent of the students actually receive the clinical experience in restoring implants, with the range of 5-100 percent. Of those schools that provide clinical experience in restoring implants, four schools (13 percent) reported that it is a requirement for them, while twenty-eight schools (88 percent) reported that it is not a requirement for them. Three schools (9 percent) did not respond. The fee for implants is 45 percent higher than a crown or a denture, with a range of 0-100 percent. Twenty-nine schools (85 percent) indicated that they did receive free components from implant companies, while five schools (15 percent) did not. The conclusions of this report are as follows: 1) most schools have advanced dental education programs; 2) single-tooth implant restorations are performed at the predoctoral level in most schools; 3) implant-retained overdenture prostheses are performed at the predoctoral level in most schools; 4) there is no predoctoral clinical competency requirement for surgical implant placement in all schools that responded to the survey; 5) there is no predoctoral clinical competency requirement for implant prosthodontics in most schools that responded to the survey; 6) prosthodontic specialty faculty are often responsible for teaching implant prosthodontics at the predoctoral level; 7) periodontics and oral and maxillofacial faculty are commonly responsible for teaching implant surgery at the predoctoral level; 8) support from implant companies is common for dental schools, with most providing for implant components at discounted costs; and 9) there is a lack of adequately trained faculty in implant dentistry, which is a significant challenge in providing predoctoral students with clinical experience with dental implants.

Eleven‐Year Report on a Predoctoral Implant Dentistry Program

“…A survey by Weintraub et al in 1995 indicated that 86% of dental schools participating in the survey had implemented a predoctoral implant dentistry program 8 and a similar level of interest was noted by Lim et al in 2005 9 . Petropoulos et al, 10 in a survey of deans of US and Canadian dental schools, reported that 97% of dental schools have didactic instruction, and 86% have clinical implant experience at the predoctoral level; however, only 13% of the schools that provide clinical experience have a predoctoral clinical competency requirement in implant prosthodontic procedures 10 …”

Dental implant maintenance teaching in Australia—A survey of education providers

“…While the previous studies of implant education in universities have reported on the involvement of various specialty departments, including specifying the departments teaching implant prosthodontics or surgery, this study presents the involvement of different disciplines in teaching implant maintenance. From this study, implant maintenance teaching in formal university qualifications and university‐based CPD programmes in Australia appears to have very strong involvement of dental specialists and periodontists in particular.…”

“…Several surveys of implant education, primarily in Europe and North America, have been conducted in the last two decades, including European consensus workshops in 2009 and 2014 . Most of these studies surveyed opinion and/or faculty leaders on the teaching of implant dentistry in undergraduate/predoctoral degree programmes, generally reporting on the topic areas included, expected competencies or clinical requirements, specialty departments/faculty involved and challenges/limitations. A few surveys reported on implant dentistry inclusion in postgraduate specialty programmes and implant‐focused CPD programmes .…”

“…Furthermore, the coverage of implant maintenance in education programmes and whether practitioners' scopes of practice are adequately updated to include implant maintenance is not known. Some surveys of implant dentistry teaching have been performed in Europe, the United Kingdom and North America, primarily of university‐run programmes, but the coverage of implant maintenance has rarely been reported upon.…”

Implant Treatment in the Predoctoral Clinic: A Retrospective Database Study of 1091 Patients

“…With the improvement of dental implants, the demand for implant treatment has increased exponentially . To accommodate this increasing demand and to prepare future dentists with necessary skills, several dental schools in the United States and abroad incorporated implant training in the curriculum . A strong correlation was found between implant training and use of implant restoration in practice after graduation.…”