(PO-162) Occlusion Curriculum in the United States: Rising to a Consensus

Author: Krithika Baskaran, D.D.S. – Associate Professor (C/T) & Assistant Director Advanced Standing International Student Program, University of Colorado School of Dental Medicine
Author: Amira Elgreatly, D.D.S.,M.S. – Clinical Assistant Professor, The University of Iowa College of Dentistry & Dental Clinics
Author: Liliana Mosquera, D.D.S, M.S,. M.B.A. – Assistant professor, Nova Southeastern University College of Dental Medicine
Author: Jennipher Murphy, M.S.
Author: Camille Hochheimer, Ph.D. – Research Associate and Consulting Manager, Colorado School of Public Health
Author: Wyatt Tarter, M.S. – Research Instructor Biostatistician
Author: RIchard Green, D.D.S., M.S.Ed
Submitter: Krithika Baskaran, D.D.S. – Associate Professor (C/T) & Assistant Director Advanced Standing International Student Program, University of C

Objective: Occlusion is a vast yet well integrated element in all disciplines of dentistry spreading over all 4 years of dental education. As the officers of the ADEA Section for Dental Anatomy and Occlusion, we wanted to understand how we teach occlusion across the country.

Methods: A survey was formulated with 18 questions encompassing teaching tools, didactic content, hands-on content, time in curriculum. Qualtrics was used to distribute the survey to members of the ADEA Section for Dental Anatomy and Occlusion via ADEA Connect. The data were analyzed using counts and percentages of total respondents (n=17) for each question.

Results: Textbooks, lecture slides, and digital aids are widely used (64.7% or more) in the teaching of occlusion in dentistry. Largely, participants agreed that the subject is taught by general dentists and specialists with lecture, lab and clinical components. Most respondents (58.8%) also indicated that they taught the concepts of CR splint with mutually protected occlusion, equilibration, and envelopes of motions, whereas 47.1% taught static & dynamic occlusion. The use of semi-adjustable Arcon type articulators (58.8%) and Denar slidematic facebows (29.4%) was most prevalent. Most students had occlusion introduced in the D1 year (70.6%). The D2 year (23.5%) was the second most frequent year of introduction, followed by equal frequencies (11.8%) for the remaining years (Advanced Standing, D3, D4).

Conclusion: In conclusion, almost all survey responders teach Occlusion within the curriculum of their dental schools. We aim to collect more data in order to finalize our results. However, these initial results are encouraging, and we hope this trend continues as we continue to survey more educators.