背景:牙科学校的主要任务是培养具有高度社会责任感的专业牙医。这项研究为专家提供了一些关于理想临床环境的实用建议,为了建立牙髓学实践研究的基础设施,牙周病,口腔颌面外科,恢复性牙科,儿科牙科,口腔颌面医学,修复术,口腔健康,社会牙科。
方法:本研究使用改良的Delphi技术分两轮进行。第一轮涉及定性内容分析。在全国范围内选择了有目的和最大多样性的访谈参与者。为了确定数据的有效性和可靠性,利用了利钦和古巴提出的四个轴。第二轮涉及研究人员制作的问卷,其中包括55个问题。该问卷已分发给全国所有牙科学校。由专家对问卷的有效性进行评估,然后进行审查。使用α系数法确定该工具的可靠性为0.96。
结果:第一轮面试的最终代码分为两类:设置和教育计划。研究的最终结果分为两个部分:教育环境和教师,和教育基础设施。70%的参与者同意使用学院的临床晨会。超过80%的人同意以拟议的结构和教授开设一家主要诊所。住院面积的运用也有80%以上的协定。此外,社区区域,如卫生服务中心,福利中心,特殊的病人中心,工厂,学校,等。达成了超过70%的协议。
结论:这项研究的结果以建议的形式提出,以改善与教育环境有关的一般牙科计划,教育工作者,和教育基础设施。参与者之间关于教育环境及其多样性的共同协议,教育计划,和期望的教师审查的研究表明,审查和改变他们的教育计划在牙髓的必要性,牙周病,口腔颌面外科,恢复性牙科,儿科牙科,口腔颌面医学,修复术,口腔健康,社会牙科。
BACKGROUND: The main task of dental schools is to prepare professional dentists with a high social responsibility. This study provided some practical suggestions from experts regarding desirable clinical settings, in order to establish an infrastructure for practical studies in Endodontics, Periodontics, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Restorative Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry, Oral and Maxillofacial Medicine, Prosthodontics, Oral Health, and Social Dentistry.
METHODS: This research was conducted using a modified Delphi technique in two rounds. The first round involved qualitative content analysis. Participants in interviews were selected purposeful and maximum diversity across the country. To determine the validity and reliability of the data, the four axes proposed by Lichon and Guba were utilized. The second round involved a researcher-made questionnaire, which consisted of 55 questions. This questionnaire was distributed to all dental schools across the country. The validity of the questionnaire were evaluated and by experts and then reviewed. The reliability of the tool was determined to be 0.96 using the alpha coefficient method.
RESULTS: The final codes from the interviews of the first round were divided into two categories: settings and educational programs. The final results of research were placed into 2 section: educational settings and instructors, and educational infrastructures. 70% participants agreed to use the college\'s clinical morning sessions. More than 80% agreed to start up a main clinic with the proposed structure and professors. The use of the hospitalization area also had an agreement of more than 80%. Additionally, community areas such as health service centers, welfare centers, special patient centers, factories, schools, etc. obtained an agreement of over 70%.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study are presented in the form of suggestions for improving the general dentistry program in relation to educational setting, educators, and educational infrastructures. The common agreement among participants regarding educational settings and their diversity, educational programs, and desired instructors reviewed in the research shows the necessity of reviewing and changing their educational programs in Endodontics, Periodontics, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Restorative Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry, Oral and Maxillofacial Medicine, Prosthodontics, Oral Health, and Social Dentistry.