Evaluation of the Learning of Prevention of Dental Decay Using Sealants of Pits and Fissures by Means of the Traditional Teaching Vs. Teaching in 3D In The School of Dentistry, UNAM
Laura Mendoza Oropeza, Ricardo Ortiz
Sanchez, Arcelia Felicitas Melendez
Correspondence Address :
Laura Mendoza Oropeza
Professor of Orthodontics
Faculty of Dentistry, UNAM
Received on: October 16, 2018, Accepted on: October 30, 2018, Published on: November 06, 2018
Citation: Laura Mendoza Oropeza, Ricardo Ortiz Sanchez, Arcelia Felicitas Melendez Ocampo (2018). Evaluation of the Learning of
Prevention of Dental DecayUsingSealants of Pits and FissuresbyMeans of the TraditionalTeaching Vs. Teaching in 3D In The
School of Dentistry, UNAM.
Copyright: 2018 Laura Mendoza Oropeza, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Currently, the development of technological advances has driven the development of educational content using third-dimensional technology, thus impacting the teaching of dentistry in a significant manner. This implementation has facilitated the updating and improvement of the teaching-learning process in the subjects that require the student to develop clinical competences.
Objective:To evaluate the impact of the contents of the 3D teaching material on the prevention of dental decay and malocclusions in childrenranging between 6 to 12 years, taught to students of- Preventive Dentistry and Public Health I at the school of Dentistry UNAM.
Method: "Preventive measures for dental caries in children aged 6 to 12 years on pits and fissures sealants" was taught. A total amount of 164 students were divided into two groups randomly: group A, the subject was taught in a traditional way. On the other hand group B was taught through a video designed with 3D images. The learning was evaluated within 24 hours by means of a questionnaire consisting of 14 multiple-choice questions using the Likert scale.
Results:The average group A was evaluated by means of the Likert scale (traditional teaching) was 24.78 (SD = 5.6), whereas B (3D) was 37.66 (SD = 2.8). The average rating of group A was 7.03 (SD = 0.9) and that of group B (3D) was 8.82 (SD = 0.7), in both cases the differences were statistically significant for a p = .001.
Conclusions:The output educational content which emerged after the use of3D allow the handling of a large amount of information in a broad and immersed display without cognitive filtering through multiple and flexible representation, promoting in the students the unification of the cognitive part with the procedural part.
Keywords:Learning of clinical techniques, 3D educational material, Traditional teaching