Improved Dental Student Laboratory Performance After Evidence Based Introduction

Objectives: To determine whether student performance in laboratory settings is affected by presence, and level, of evidence-based information.
Methods: We investigated the performance of 96 students in 2016 and 90 in 2017 (186 students total) randomly separated (by faculty) into Groups A, B, and C. Group A received basic bleaching-tray construction information. Group B received basic information along with clinically relevant images. Group C received information presented to Group B along with evidence-based supporting articles. Students met functional criteria by creating a reservoir and/or tray contouring. Clinical acceptability was met using four criteria: contours, smooth edges, reservoir, and gingival proximity.
Results: For groups A, B, and C (2016 freshmen), results showed that Group A, B, and C met 93.8%, 87.5%, and 100% of functionality criteria. Groups A, B, and C (2017 freshmen) met 96.8%, 92.8%, and 100% of functionality criteria. Group C (2016 freshmen) met both criteria (66%) more often than Group A and B (both at 56%). Group C (2017 freshmen) met both criteria (80.7%) more often than Group A and B (71%, and 35.7%) (Chi-square p=.007). Group B for both classes had the highest amount of students who were unable to meet both criteria (2016: 13% vs. 2017: 7.14%). Group B was the only group with students unable to meet any of the 4 clinical criteria (2016: 2 and 2017: 2).
Conclusions: The lecture containing limited evidence-based information yielded a small but statistically measurable improvement in performance. The results also seem to suggest that information limited to clinical photographs (Group B) is not helpful to student performance. Further investigation is warranted to identify factors relating to higher Groups A and C performance versus Group B performance.