Assessment of Preparedness for Medical Emergencies in Saudi Dental Colleges: A National Cross‐Sectional Study

BACKGROUND: Medical emergencies can occur during dental treatment and may become life-threatening without timely and appropriate management. Dental colleges have a dual responsibility to ensure patient safety in their clinical facilities and to prepare future dentists to recognise and manage medical emergencies. However, national-level evidence regarding emergency preparedness across dental colleges in Saudi Arabia remains limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess medical emergency preparedness among dental colleges in Saudi Arabia by evaluating personnel preparedness; the availability of essential emergency equipment and medications; medication storage and safety practices; and institutional self-perceived preparedness, and to explore differences between governmental and private dental colleges. METHODS: A national cross-sectional institutional survey was conducted using a census approach. All 28 dental colleges identified in Saudi Arabia in 2025 were invited to participate, including 20 governmental and 8 private colleges. Data were collected using a structured, pilot-tested institutional questionnaire covering personnel preparedness; emergency equipment and medications; storage and safety practices; and institutional self-perceived preparedness. Categorical data were summarised using frequencies and percentages. Exploratory comparisons between governmental and private colleges were performed using two-sided Fisher's exact tests. Because 46 item-level comparisons were conducted, Holm adjustment was applied as a sensitivity analysis for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were received from 26 colleges (18 governmental and 8 private), yielding an overall response rate of 92.9%. Among the 26 participating colleges, 16 (61.5%) reported incorporating medical emergency-management courses into their curricula, while 10 (38.5%) conducted periodic mock emergency drills. Annual basic life support (BLS) training for newly joined staff and annual BLS renewal were each reported by 17 colleges (65.4%). Staff access to emergency drugs and equipment was reported by 19 colleges (73.1%), whereas only 9 (34.6%) reported that students and staff knew how to use dental emergency medications. Emergency kits/carts and automated external defibrillators (AEDs) were each available in 24 dental colleges (92.3%), while sphygmomanometers were available in 25 (96.2%). Availability was lower for Magill forceps (38.5%) and nebulizers (30.8%). Oral glucose was available in 25 dental colleges (96.2%), whereas glucagon (26.9%), aminophylline (19.2%) and intranasal/buccal midazolam (11.5%) were less frequently available. Baseline vital-sign recording was mandated in 8 colleges (30.8%), despite patient history being mandated in 25 (96.2%). Regarding institutional self-perceived preparedness, none of the participating dental colleges rated their preparedness as "very well" prepared. 20 (76.9%) rated themselves as "fairly well" prepared, and 6 (23.1%) reported "limited" preparedness. Several nominal differences were observed between dental governmental and private colleges in individual preparedness indicators; however, none remained statistically significant after Holm correction. CONCLUSION: Medical emergency preparedness among Saudi dental colleges appears adequate in several fundamental preparedness domains but remains variable, particularly regarding practical training, simulation drills, selected emergency equipment and medications and routine baseline vital-sign assessment. These findings support the development of standardised national preparedness benchmarks, regular simulation-based training and systematic monitoring of emergency equipment and medication readiness across dental colleges.