1. A Collaborative Review of the Field of Simulation-Enhanced Dental Education
Margaret J. Cox1, Barry F.A. Quinn1, Arash Shahriari-Rad1, Marjoke J. Vervoorn2, Paul R. Wesselink2 and
Ilse R. de Boer2
1Dental Institute, King’s College London, University of London, UK ACTA – University of Amsterdam
Aim
The aim was to compare and review the longitudinal research results of using two haptic simulators to teach undergraduate dental students; to identify important features of haptic system design and the strategies which enable haptic simulators to be incorporated effectively in the curriculum.
Materials and Methods
Acknowledgements
Our thanks are due to:
King’s College London Dental Institute, the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) for funding the the original hapTEL project which developed and evaluated the hapTEL virtual dental system
and
The University of Amsterdam for funding the development and evaluation of the Simudont system
Published Dental Education Literature :A substantial review was conducted of 40 years’ research and development to identify the impact of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) in Education including:
TEL impact in dental education;
A model of the teaching and learning process in higher education (see Figure 2);
Developing and using haptic simulators in dental education.
Comparisons of the development and evaluation of two virtual dental simulators
Comparisons were made of the development, evaluation and lessons learnt of the two systems (see Figure 1) both of which have now been used by large numbers of student cohorts for more than 6 years.
The hapTEL project – system developed at King’s College London
The ACTA project – Simodont system developed at the University of Amsterdam
Figure 1: On the left is the Simudont System developed by ACTA
and on the right is the hapTEL system developed by the hapTEL project
Results
Figure 2: Educational Evaluation Framework – A model of the teaching-learning process in higher education Entwistle (1987)
The results showed the design differences between the systems were as follows:
The hapTEL system has no incorporated structured lesson plans or goals like the Simodont system:
The Simodont system has a very small screen simulating a mouth aperture but not allowing use by pairs or groups so easily as the hapTEL system;
The Simodont system aims to provide students with dental problems in the perspective of a patient, teaching students from the beginning to involve the patient information in their clinical decisions;
The hapTEL system allows students to experience working in pairs as the ‘dentist’ and the ‘nurse’ simulating the team work in real dental clinics.
Evaluation results show that both systems have enhanced students' learning of clinical skills and self reflection.
Award Number: RES
Conclusions
The evidence from the literature and this comparative review shows that:
The benefits of using virtual reality simulators for dental and other healthcare programmes may significantly enhance students’ learning
Successive student evaluations of haptic simulators have shown that they enhance the learning of the hand-eye coordination and fine motor control over and above similar uses of the traditional phantom head system
It is not necessary to have a complete range of features in order for students to benefit from the use of virtual dental simulators
In the longer term use of haptic simulators in education should improve the treatment and increase the safety of patients.
Reference
Entwistle, N. (1987). A model of the teaching-learning process. In J. T. E. Richardson, M. Eysenck, & D. Piper (Eds.), Student learning: research in education and cognitive psychology (pp ). Milton Keynes England; Philadelphia PA USA: Society for Research into Higher Education ;Open University Press.
Web Addresses
Tel. No. +44(0)
+31-(0)