Evaluation reveals enhanced learning outcomes in dental students using haptic simulators for anesthesia, suggesting improved techniques and confidence.
Teaching dental anesthesia techniques poses a considerable challenge, primarily due to the limited availability of tools that effectively replicate clinical procedures in preclinical settings. Over the past decade, haptic dental simulators have emerged as promising training aids for various dental procedures, including local anesthesia. This study aimed to evaluate the educational value of a haptic dental simulator in teaching the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) technique by assessing the experiences and perceptions of dental students with varying levels of clinical exposure. A total of 70 dental students from the second, third, and fourth year (DS2, DS3, and DS4) were recruited. Following the training session, all students performed the IANB technique using the device and subsequently completed a survey to assess their perceptions of the learning experience. Survey results and performance metrics collected from the simulator were processed and statistically analyzed using percentage mapping, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey's post hoc test. Most students found the simulator user-friendly and realistic in replicating tissue resistance (≥ 90%). DS2 students achieved greater accuracy in targeting the nerve (4.58 ± 2.08 vs. 6.03 ± 2.78 mm), while DS3/DS4 students demonstrated better control of anesthetic delivery. Feedback noted increased confidence and understanding, alongside suggestions for improving syringe handling, positioning, and aspiration. Despite simulator limitations, 96.8% of DS3/DS4 students supported incorporating the simulator into the curriculum. These findings highlight the preference of Generation Z students for interactive learning methods and support the implementation of haptic simulators as a promising tool for dental anesthesia training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fugolin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: