Abstract:

Introduction
Prosthetic dentistry course forms more than 12% of total dental degree program. It includes lectures, dental technology teaching, problem-based learning, evidence-based practice, simulation training sessions, and clinical training. The course outline is designed to teach undergraduate students the basic knowledge with practical skill to manage partially and completely edentulous patients and to participate effectively as oral-health-provider after graduation. The prosthetic course allocates 60% of total hours for total edentates’ rehabilitation while 40% is addressed to partial denture knowledge and advanced prosthodontics. Teaching and learning of partial denture constitutes a major concern for teachers as well as learners due to its high education level according to Bloom’s taxonomy. The achievement of high learning outcome is affected by education environment, instructional technologies and students’ performance. It was hypothesized that blended teaching methods can enhance students’ interest to study, better understanding, and to apply the acquired knowledge in variable clinical situations as in case of partial dentures. Accordingly, multiple instructional technologies were applied in teaching partial denture for year 4 and 5 students. The objective of this research was to display and share the results of removable partial denture learning outcome using multiple instruction methods and students’ perception of each teaching model.

Methodology:
Data were collected from 70 students in year 4 and 5 dental degree program. Teaching models like interactive teaching, interactive case design, case study simulation, small group discussion, partially edentulous patient management and framework design solving, homework release, open book examination and digital designing method using software were conducted by 2 lecturers. Two exams were done one before starting and the other at the end of the module. The tests were designed to evaluate the basic knowledge and designing skill of removable partial dentures. Furthermore, questionnaire was designed to reveal the students’ opinions and their perception toward mixed training technologies and the final learning outcome was used as assessment tools at the end of the course. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test and chi-square test at ρ<0.05 significance level.

Results
The students’ results showed significant enhancement in the final assessments compared to the baseline of student’s performance in partial denture knowledge and designing the framework in general. The analysis of students’ responses was very encouraging in favor of application of this teaching model. They were especially interested in interactive designing, discussion, small group work, and homework activities. In addition, they found that open book examination was very interesting and more helpful in applying the difficult instructions. Moreover, they stated an increase desire for learning and elimination of monotone feeling due to long study hours of same subject. Students supported the idea of applying this mode in more disciplines.

Conclusions
Mixed teaching techniques were applied successfully in partial denture teaching. The students were satisfied and support its application in other dental areas. We encourage its application as a fixed strategy in dentistry.

Keywords:

Interactive Teaching, blended instructional teaching, Collaborative case design, Patient case study and simulation, Brainstorming technique, Digital designing.