Observational analysis shows hobbies influence fine motor skills in first-year students, suggesting cooking may enhance training outcomes.
Introduction Dental students develop fine motor skills that include a complex interplay of finger dexterity, posture and progressive visual‐tactile improvement through spatial awareness and cognition facilitated through university simulation training. Identifying students with a natural aptitude for these skills is vital to make the most of available resources. This study examines the relationship between pre‐existing hobbies and fine motor skills before and after a five‐week training module. Materials and Methods Seventy‐two first‐year students at an Australian University completed a questionnaire that measured their personal interests. Students' performance on a foundational cavity preparation task was assessed before and after five weeks of simulation clinic training on plastic typodont teeth. In‐class assessment tasks aimed to evaluate innate and acquired skills. The relationships between personal interests and cavity preparation skills, before and after the simulation training, were explored. Results The three hobbies with the highest mean cavity preparation percentage at baseline were playing music (51.7%; 95% CI: 41.5, 61.9), cooking (50.3%; 95% CI: 45.1, 55.5) and participating in sports (48.4%; 95% CI: 42.9, 53.8). Estimated mean improvement in cavity preparation was highest for participants that had cooking as the only hobby (19.2%; 95% CI: 14.4, 24.1). Participants with four hobbies had the lowest mean improvement in cavity preparation, with 11.3 (95% CI: 5.1, 17.5) percentage units. Participants with zero hobbies improved by 11.7 (95% CI: 7.7, 15.7) percentage units. Conclusion Cooking at least once a week has a better impact on the mean improvement in scores after formal university simulation training than other hobbies. Students without any identified hobbies might benefit from task‐specific training for fine motor skills improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shetty et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: