Nuestro grupo organiza más de 3000 Series de conferencias Eventos cada año en EE. UU., Europa y América. Asia con el apoyo de 1.000 sociedades científicas más y publica más de 700 Acceso abierto Revistas que contienen más de 50.000 personalidades eminentes, científicos de renombre como miembros del consejo editorial.

Revistas de acceso abierto que ganan más lectores y citas
700 revistas y 15 000 000 de lectores Cada revista obtiene más de 25 000 lectores

Abstracto

Experience and Practicality of Rubber Dam Use among Undergraduate Dental Students in Fiji

Mohammadnezhad M*, Prasad A and Cumberbatch M

Background: Every dental school has the responsibility to teach its students the ideal techniques of isolation prior to the clinical procedure. Rubber dam is considered to be an essential tool for conservative dentistry; hence its preclinical training to dental students is of uttermost importance. Due to lack of previous study, this study aims to assess the experience of undergraduate dental students at Fiji National University (FNU) on use of rubber dam.
Methodology: This is a cross-sectional quantitative study whereby 48 self-administrated questionnaires were distributed among the third, fourth and fifth year dental students at FNU. All the students in that respective year were also observed for the time taken to place rubber dam using an observation checklist. The data was analyzed using the Epi-Info software.
Results: A 100% response rate was obtained. Among the 48 participants, 30 were females and 18 were males. 75% of the participants stated moisture control as the major advantage of rubber dam use. Difficulty in placing rubber dams was a main disadvantage highlighted by 35% of the student while 27% stated that placing rubber dam took up extra clinical time. The mean time taken to place rubber dam was 6 minutes to the nearest minute on adult patients. Students preferred to use cotton rolls for isolation during Glass Ionomer Cement (79%) and Amalgam (65%) procedures. Majority of the students felt that the training and teaching sessions on rubber dam are sufficient. The major problems identified by students while placing rubber dam were lack of appropriate clamps, patient acceptance and compliance.
Conclusion: The level of knowledge among undergraduate students on the advantages and disadvantages of rubber dam is high. There are various factors in practice and training that could be emphasized to encourage students on future use of rubber dam. Among the undergraduate dental students there was still a high possibility that they might not practice routine placement of rubber dam after graduation. There is scope for further study on the rubber dam practice of general dental practitioners.