Methods: To check the starting level of knowledge regarding the proposed theme, the party answered a questionnaire with ten multiple choice questions. Afterwards, one of the groups read a folder while the other watched a lecture about trauma, and, thereafter, both groups answered again the same questionnaire. The answers were divided in categories and carried different weights, according to the level of knowledge, as satisfactory (good) or non-satisfactory (bad). The data was submitted to qui-square test and odds-ratio.
Results: Both groups had similar results on the first questionnaire (p> 0.05). A statistical difference was found between the results of the group that read the folder (p=0.0008). However, on the group that watched the lecture, the difference was not so expressive (p=0.1395). The chances of reaching five or more right answers (satisfactory level of knowledge) was seven times higher than the initial for a person who read the folder (OR=7.0) and twice higher for a person who watched the lecture (OR=2.2).
Conclusions: Both techniques afforded the acquisition of new knowledge about dental trauma, although only the folder reading increased statistically the number of right answers.