Digital PBL-CBL teaching method improves students' performance in learning complex implant cases in atrophic anterior maxilla.

BACKGROUND

The clinical teaching of esthetic implant-supported restoration of the atrophic maxilla is challenging due to the complexity and unpredictability of bone and soft tissue augmentation. The traditional problem-based learning and case-based learning method (PBL-CBL method) with a full digital workflow (digital PBL-CBL method) provides the students a chance to view clinical cases in a more accurate and measurable way. The aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of the new digital PBL-CBL method in teaching complex implant cases in esthetic area.

MATERIALS & METHODS: A full digital workflow of dental implant therapy was established for patients with severely atrophic anterior maxilla. The digital data of cases done in the new workflow was used as teaching materials in digital PBL-CBL teaching. Fifty-four postgraduate students were randomly selected and divided into three groups, including traditional PBL-CBL group (students taught in a PBL-CBL method with no digital cases), digital PBL-CBL group (students taught in a PBL-CBL method with full digital cases) and control group (students taught in didactic teacher-centered method). After training for three months, a study of the students' opinions on the corresponding teaching method was carried out through a feedback questionnaire. A theory test was used to evaluate students' mastery of knowledge about tissue augmentation and esthetic implant restoration. A case analysis was used to determine whether students could apply the knowledge to problem solving.

RESULTS

The digital PBL-CBL method resulted in a higher rate of satisfaction than the traditional PBL-CBL method and the didactic teacher-centered method in all items except for "This approach decreases extracurricular work". Case analysis scores of the digital PBL-CBL group were significantly higher than that of the traditional PBL-CBL group and the control group. For the theory test, the digital PBL-CBL group (61.00 ± 6.80) but not traditional PBL-CBL group (55.22 ± 9.86) obtained a significant higher score than the control group (45.11 ± 12.76), although no significant difference was found between the digital PBL-CBL group and the traditional PBL-CBL group.

CONCLUSION

Compared with other methods, students taught with the digital PBL-CBL method showed higher satisfaction and better performance in acquisition of academic knowledge and ability in solving practical clinical problems. The digital PBL-CBL method provided a promising alternative for teaching complex implant cases at the anterior maxilla.