PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2023; 17(04): 1179-1188
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1758793
Original Article

Comparative Analysis of Manual Dexterity of Dental Students at Ajman University following One Academic Year of Preclinical Training Sessions: A Longitudinal Cohort Study

Musab Saeed
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
2   Centre of Medical and Bio-allied Health Sciences Research, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
,
Mohammed B.Q. Alfarra
3   Department of Basic Sciences, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
,
Mawada Hassan Abdelmagied
3   Department of Basic Sciences, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
,
Karrar Hadi
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
,
Tareq Aljafarawi
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
,
Noor Al-Rawi
4   Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
,
Asmaa T. Uthman
5   Department of Diagnostic and Surgical Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Gulf Medical University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
,
Salem Abu Fanas
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
2   Centre of Medical and Bio-allied Health Sciences Research, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
,
Natheer H. Al Rawi 
6   Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objectives Dental students must complete two stages of training, namely, preclinical training on phantom head models and clinical training on actual patients to acquire the practical skills required by their Bachelor of Dental Surgery program.

Our objectives are to evaluate the level of improvement of the manual skills obtained by third-year dental students after one full academic year of preclinical training courses using dexterity tests under direct and indirect vision and to compare the improvement among male and female dental students under the same conditions.

Materials and Methods A total of 72 preclinical students participated in our cohort trial, each of whom was assigned a random identification number that was only known to the researchers. After the beginning of the academic year, the experiment was performed under identical conditions for both the O'Connor Tweezer Dexterity Test and the Purdue Pegboard Test. The examinations were conducted at two distinct times: T0 before phantom laboratory training (the beginning of preclinical sessions) and T1 after phantom laboratory training (9 months after T0).

Statistical Analysis Signed-rank test of Wilcoxon over two separate periods (T0 and T1), comparisons were made between the direct and indirect visual dexterity test scores. In addition, the Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare results across gender. The statistical significance (p-value) was set at below 0.05 with a confidence level of 95%.

Results A statistically significant difference was detected between the T0 and T1 assessments on the Purdue Pegboard Test and the O'Connor Tweezer Dexterity Test for all selected dentistry students in both direct and indirect conditions (p < 0.001).

Conclusion Further investigation in other dental departments or schools, particularly those with different entry standards, is required prior to making a definitive conclusion about the use of these dexterity assessments as predictors of prospective dental students' performance.

Keywords

preclinical training - manual dexterity - dental students - Purdue Pegboard Test - O'Connor Tweezer Dexterity Test


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
19. Dezember 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Weinstein P, Kiyak HA, Milgrom P, Ratener P, Morrison K. Manual dexterity as a predictor of quality of care among dental practitioners. J Dent Educ 1979; 43 (03) 165-169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Spratley MH. Aptitude testing and the selection of dental students. Aust Dent J 1990; 35 (02) 159-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Carmeli E, Patish H, Coleman R. The aging hand. J Gerontol A Biol Sci. Med Sci 2003; 58 (02) M146-M152
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Al-Saud LM, Mushtaq F, Allsop MJ. et al. Feedback and motor skill acquisition using a haptic dental simulator. Eur J Dent Educ 2017; 21 (04) 240-247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Koo S, Kim A, Donoff RB, Karimbux NY. An initial assessment of haptics in preclinical operative dentistry training. J Investig Clin Dent 2015; 6 (01) 69-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lugassy D, Levanon Y, Pilo R. et al. Predicting the clinical performance of dental students with a manual dexterity test. PLoS One 2018; 13 (03) e0193980
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gonzalez V, Rowson J, Yoxall A. Development of the variable dexterity test: construction, reliability and validity. Int J Ther Rehabil 2015; 22 (04) 174-180
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Berger MA, Krul AJ, Daanen HA. Task specificity of finger dexterity tests. Appl Ergon 2009; 40 (01) 145-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lundergan WP, Soderstrom EJ, Chambers DW. Tweezer dexterity aptitude of dental students. J Dent Educ 2007; 71 (08) 1090-1097
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Simon JF, Chambers DW. The search for a profile of aptitudes that characterize dentists. J Dent Educ 1992; 56 (05) 317-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 O'Connor J. Human Engineering Laboratory (U.S.). Aptitudes and the languages. [Boston]: Human engineering laboratory. incorporated 1944
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Barbería E, Fernández-Frías C, Suárez-Clúa C, Saavedra D. Analysis of anxiety variables in dental students. Int Dent J 2004; 54 (06) 445-449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Imam SZ. Manual dexterity: an important tool for dentists. EC Dent Sci. 2019; 18: 1409-1419
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Kuzgun H, Denat Y. The manual dexterity of nursing students and factors that affect it. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 2020; 26 (01) 9-14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hegarty M, Keehner M, Khooshabeh P, Montello DR. How spatial abilities enhance, and are enhanced by, dental education. Learn Individ Differ 2009; 19 (01) 61-70
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Dimitrijevic T, Kahler B, Evans G, Collins M, Moule A. Depth and distance perception of dentists and dental students. Oper Dent 2011; 36 (05) 467-477
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Suksudaj N, Townsend GC, Kaidonis J, Lekkas D, Winning TA. Acquiring psychomotor skills in operative dentistry: do innate ability and motivation matter?. Eur J Dent Educ 2012; 16 (01) e187-e194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kao EC, Ngan PW, Wilson S, Kunovich R. Wire-bending test as a predictor of preclinical performance by dental students. Percept Mot Skills 1990; 71 (02) 667-673
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gray SA, Deem LP. Predicting student performance in preclinical technique courses using the theory of ability determinants of skilled performance. J Dent Educ 2002; 66 (06) 721-727
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Landers DM. The effects of mental practice on motor skill learning and performance: a meta-analysis. J Sport Psychol 1983; 5 (01) 25-57
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Boyd MA, Rucker LM. Effects of immediate introduction of indirect vision on performance and posture. J Dent Educ 1987; 51 (02) 98-101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Mathiowetz V, Rogers SL, Dowe-Keval M, Donahoe L, Rennells C. The Purdue Pegboard: norms for 14- to 19-year-olds. Am J Occup Ther 1986; 40 (03) 174-179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Thorndike EL. The effect of practice in the case of a purely intellectual function. Am J Psychol 1908; 19 (03) 374-384
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Osgood CE. The similarity paradox in human learning; a resolution. Psychol Rev 1949; 56 (03) 132-143
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Provins KA. The specificity of motor skill and manual asymmetry: a review of the evidence and its implications. J Mot Behav 1997; 29 (02) 183-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Case-Smith J. Effects of occupational therapy services on fine motor and functional performance in preschool children. Am J Occup Ther 2000; 54 (04) 372-380
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Upadhayay N, Guragain S. Comparison of cognitive functions between male and female medical students: a pilot study. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8 (06) BC12-BC15
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Luck O, Reitemeier B, Scheuch K. Testing of fine motor skills in dental students. Eur J Dent Educ 2000; 4 (01) 10-14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Peters M, Servos P, Day R. Marked sex differences on a fine motor skill task disappear when finger size is used as covariate. J Appl Psychol 1990; 75 (01) 87-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Gansky SA, Pritchard H, Kahl E. et al. Reliability and validity of a manual dexterity test to predict preclinical grades. J Dent Educ 2004; 68 (09) 985-994
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lugassy D, Levanon Y, Shpack N, Levartovsky S, Pilo R, Brosh T. An interventional study for improving the manual dexterity of dentistry students. PLoS One 2019; 14 (02) e0211639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Hampson E. Variations in sex-related cognitive abilities across the menstrual cycle. Brain Cogn 1990; 14 (01) 26-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Giuliani M, Lajolo C, Clemente L. et al. Is manual dexterity essential in the selection of dental students?. Br Dent J 2007; 203 (03) 149-155
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Wang YC, Magasi SR, Bohannon RW. et al. Assessing dexterity function: a comparison of two alternatives for the NIH Toolbox. J Hand Ther 2011; 24 (04) 313-320 , quiz 321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 de Andrés AG, Sánchez E, Hidalgo JJ, Díaz MJ. Appraisal of psychomotor skills of dental students at University Complutense of Madrid. Eur J Dent Educ 2004; 8 (01) 24-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Kothe C, Hissbach J, Hampe W. Prediction of practical performance in preclinical laboratory courses - the return of wire bending for admission of dental students in Hamburg. GMS Z Med Ausbild 2014; 31 (02) Doc22
    PubMedGoogle Scholar