(PO-189) Technology Adoption in Dental Hygiene Clinical Environments

Author: Natalie M. Delacruz, Ph.D. – Assistant Professor/Assistant Director BSDH Degree Completion Program, Wichita State University/ Department of Dental Hygiene
Author: Brandi Carlson, M.S., RDH – Assistant Professor, Wichita State University/Department of Dental Hygiene
Author: Barbara Smith, Ph.D. – Professor, Wichita State University/Department of Physical Therapy
Submitter: Natalie M. Delacruz, Ph.D. – Assistant Professor/Assistant Director BSDH Degree Completion Program, Wichita State University/ Depar

Understanding potential limitations of technology integration are important for developing high-quality academic programs that enhance traditional andragogy. This study explored factors that affect the decision to adopt technology in dental hygiene clinical environments among educators. The purpose was to identify if adoption is affected by age, level of education, teaching experience, technology anxiety, perceived barriers to technology integration, technology availability, or training sources utilized.

Methods: This IRB approved study utilized the Technology Adoption in a Dental Hygiene Clinical Environment survey. An email invitation was sent to dental hygiene educators with full-time, part-time, and clinical appointments across the United States (n=1571). A census sampling of participating faculty members (1571/275) resulted in 17.5% response rate.

Results: Positive correlations were found for all four section totals and the opinion statement that technology is unreliable. This statement was negative, thus most respondents disagreed/strongly disagreed that technology was unreliable. Significant relationship (p < .01) occurred for the opinion statement (there is too much technology) and all section totals. However, the correlation coefficient for the opinion statement and total for section 2 (technology use in dental hygiene clinical environments) was negative. In section 4, quartile scores indicated that respondents want more technical support. Frequency analysis showed an array of perceived abilities and technological integration by these respondents such as: barriers in integrating technology were minimal, anxiety about learning new technology skills was low, all respondents had access to dental office software, intra/extra oral camera, computer/laptops, and internet/wireless connection. The outlook for future use of technology in dental hygiene clinical environments were positive.

Conclusions: The current dental hygiene workforce is rapidly evolving and technology is a contributing factor to this advancement. Dental hygiene educational programs depend on faculty knowledge and clinical skills to educate students on the most current technologies used in the clinical setting.