Cross-sectional study highlights design thinking's potential in dental education, suggesting curriculum reforms for improved application.
BACKGROUND: Design thinking, an innovative problem-solving approach, holds immense potential to transform dental education and clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study assessed the awareness, application, and impact of design thinking among 1649 dental students and professionals, including undergraduates, interns, and postgraduates using the Reconvene Evidence-informed Visions and Advance Methodology Perspicacity questionnaire. Data analysis revealed significant differences in familiarity, with interns reporting the highest awareness (17.9%), followed by undergraduates (13.2%) and postgraduates (9.4%) ( P < 0.001). RESULTS: The result show that the knowledge about its application in dental sciences was similar across groups, with approximately 20% expressing familiarity. Enthusiasm for learning about design thinking was widespread, with postgraduates (87.8%) showing the greatest interest. The study also highlighted disparities in perceptions of research and innovation ( P = 0.003), soft skills and leadership ( P = 0.022), and transitioning to digital methods ( P = 0.045). While 94.1% of participants advocated for curriculum reform to include clinical management and innovation, the practical adoption of digital tools and integrated patient management software remained low, particularly among postgraduates. Comparisons with existing literature revealed similar trends globally, with high interest but inconsistent integration of design thinking in dental education. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that systemic barriers, including limited curriculum exposure and resource constraints, hinder the practical adoption of design thinking. The study underscores the need for targeted educational reforms, including interdisciplinary modules, to bridge the gap between interest and application. Integrating design thinking into dental education can foster critical competencies, preparing future professionals to address evolving clinical, technological, and patient care challenges.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kumar et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: