Display options
Share it on

J Dent Educ. 2018 Nov;82(11):1213-1219. doi: 10.21815/JDE.018.126.

The Status of Interdisciplinary Education in Advanced Education Programs at U.S. Dental Schools.

Journal of dental education

Vidya Ramaswamy, Nadeem Karimbux, Irina F Dragan, Noshir R Mehta, Theodora Danciu

Affiliations

  1. Vidya Ramaswamy is Associate Director for Curriculum and Program Evaluation, University of Michigan School of Dentistry; Nadeem Karimbux is Academic Dean and Professor, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Irina F. Dragan is Assistant Professor, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Noshir R. Mehta is Professor of Public Health and Community Service, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; and Theodora Danciu is Clinical Associate Professor, University of Michigan School of Dentistry.
  2. Vidya Ramaswamy is Associate Director for Curriculum and Program Evaluation, University of Michigan School of Dentistry; Nadeem Karimbux is Academic Dean and Professor, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Irina F. Dragan is Assistant Professor, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Noshir R. Mehta is Professor of Public Health and Community Service, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; and Theodora Danciu is Clinical Associate Professor, University of Michigan School of Dentistry. [email protected].

PMID: 30385688 DOI: 10.21815/JDE.018.126

Abstract

Interdisciplinary education (IDE) during dental residencies can help produce dentists who work more efficiently to provide continuous and reliable patient care. The aim of this study was to assess the extent and type of interdisciplinary education in dental residency programs at U.S. dental schools. A 24-item survey addressing didactic courses and patient care was sent to academic and/or clinical deans at 65 U.S. dental schools in fall 2016; they were asked to forward the survey to the appropriate person in their school. The questions addressed IDE characteristics such as the academic home for IDE, focus areas, defined outcomes, program objectives, and perceived institutional barriers. Of the 65 schools invited to participate, 31 responded to the survey for an overall response rate of 48%. Of those schools, 23 (74%) reported having IDE for their advanced/postgraduate students. Among the schools with IDE, their IDE learning experiences primarily involved residents in different disciplines participating in clinical case group projects and small group workshops, and 77% of IDE faculty taught in department-specific clinical spaces as opposed to teaching together in a single clinic. The respondents identified barriers to implementing IDE such as a lack of clearly defined competencies, logistical challenges including academic calendars and scheduling, and faculty resistance. Also, 43% reported that their institutions did not have a program to support IDE faculty development. At the time of this survey, most of the respondents did not have a clearly defined IDE model consisting of competencies, defined assessments, and milestones.

Keywords: advanced dental education; curriculum; dental residents; interdisciplinary education; postgraduate dental education

MeSH terms

Publication Types