JDE
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Dent Educ. 72(6): 698-706 2008
© 2008 American Dental Education Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Meraner, M.
Right arrow Articles by Nase, J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Meraner, M.
Right arrow Articles by Nase, J. B.

Milieu in Dental School and Practice

Magnification in Dental Practice and Education: Experience and Attitudes of a Dental School Faculty

Mark Meraner, D.D.S.; John B. Nase, D.D.S.

Key words: questionnaires, dental education, vision, perception, magnification

Submitted for publication 01/11/08; accepted 03/14/08

The routine use of magnification and enhanced lighting by oral health care providers, educators, and students is growing, but there is little consensus regarding its implementation and use. Many students and faculty at the Temple University Kornberg School of Dentistry elect to use some form of magnification in their real and simulated patient care activities, even though the school does not mandate or suggest standards for its utilization. A questionnaire was administered to the clinical faculty to assess two parameters: experience with magnification, and attitudes concerning the value of enhanced vision. Eighty-two out of 124 eligible participants completed the questionnaire successfully for a 66 percent return rate. Sixty-one percent of respondents reported their primary practice or teaching activities as "general dentistry or restorative/prosthodontics." The remainder of the respondents represented a cross-section of other departments and specialists. All endodontists and periodontists who completed the survey and 56 percent of the general/restorative dentists indicated they use magnification. This group accounted for 91 percent of all magnification users. Thirty-nine percent in the magnification users group indicated that they avoid using magnification for some procedures. Faculty magnification users are not in full agreement about the value of enhanced vision in a dental education program. Nearly one-quarter of all magnification users indicated it is unlikely they would use magnification in the teaching environment, even though they may use it in private practice. Various explanations were given for this inconsistency. Only 61 percent of magnification users indicated they make a point to talk to students about the uses and benefits of magnification. While 91 percent of users said that magnification offers significant benefits, only 73 percent believe it should be a program requirement, and 61 percent think it should be required beginning in the first year of the curriculum. The findings of this survey suggest that educational institutions would be wise to address faculty concerns and reasons for resistance before moving to the mandated use of magnification.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Dental Education Association.