Rodrigo Alves Tubelo1, Vicente Leitune Castelo Branco2, Alessandra Dahmer3, Susana Maria Werner Samuel4, Fabrício Mezzomo Collares5. 1. Laboratório de Materiais Dentários, Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal do, Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2492-4o andar, Laboratório de Materiais Dentários-Bairro Rio Branco, Porto Alegre CEP: 90035-004, Brazil. Electronic address: rodrigo.tubelo@ufrgs.br. 2. Laboratório de Materiais Dentários, Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal do, Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2492-4o andar, Laboratório de Materiais Dentários-Bairro Rio Branco, Porto Alegre CEP: 90035-004, Brazil. Electronic address: vicente.leitune@ufrgs.br. 3. Departamento de Ensino em Saúde, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Rua Sarmento Leite, 245/212-Bairro Centro, Porto Alegre CEP: 90050-170, Brazil. Electronic address: adahmer@gmail.com. 4. Laboratório de Materiais Dentários, Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal do, Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2492-4o andar, Laboratório de Materiais Dentários-Bairro Rio Branco, Porto Alegre CEP: 90035-004, Brazil. Electronic address: 00005598@ufrgs.br. 5. Laboratório de Materiais Dentários, Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal do, Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2492-4o andar, Laboratório de Materiais Dentários-Bairro Rio Branco, Porto Alegre CEP: 90035-004, Brazil. Electronic address: fabricio.collares@ufrgs.br.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to evaluate the influence of virtual learning object (VLO) in the theoretical knowledge and skill practice of undergraduate dentistry students as it relates to zinc phosphate cement (ZPC). METHODS:Only students enrolled in the dentistry course the course were included in the trial. Forty-six students received a live class regarding ZPC and were randomized by electronic sorting into the following 4 groups: VLO Immediate (GIVLOn=9), VLO longitudinal (GLVLOn=15) and two control groups without VLO (GICn=9 and GLCn=13). The immediate groups had access to VLO or a book for 20 min before the ability assessment, whereas the longitudinal groups had access to VLO or a book for 15 days. RESULTS: A pre- and posttest on theoretical knowledge and two laboratory skill tests, evaluated by blinded examiners, were performed regarding zinc phosphate cement manipulation in all groups. The students who used the VLO obtained better results in all the tests performed than the control students. The theoretical posttest showed a significant difference between the longitudinal groups, GLC (6.0 ± 1.15) and GLVLO (7.33 ± 1.43). The lower film thickness presented with a significant difference in the VLO groups: (GIC 25 ± 9.3) and GIVLO (16.24 ± 5.17); GLC (50 ± 27.08) and GLVLO (22.5±9.65). The higher setting time occurred in the VLO groups, and the immediate group showed a significant difference (GIC 896 ± 218.90) and GIVLO (1138.5 ± 177.95). CONCLUSIONS: The ZPC manipulated by the students who used the VLO had better mechanical properties in the laboratory tests. Therefore, the groups that used the VLO had clinical handling skills superior to its controls and greater retention of knowledge after 15 days.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to evaluate the influence of virtual learning object (VLO) in the theoretical knowledge and skill practice of undergraduate dentistry students as it relates to zinc phosphate cement (ZPC). METHODS: Only students enrolled in the dentistry course the course were included in the trial. Forty-six students received a live class regarding ZPC and were randomized by electronic sorting into the following 4 groups: VLO Immediate (GIVLOn=9), VLO longitudinal (GLVLOn=15) and two control groups without VLO (GICn=9 and GLCn=13). The immediate groups had access to VLO or a book for 20 min before the ability assessment, whereas the longitudinal groups had access to VLO or a book for 15 days. RESULTS: A pre- and posttest on theoretical knowledge and two laboratory skill tests, evaluated by blinded examiners, were performed regarding zinc phosphate cement manipulation in all groups. The students who used the VLO obtained better results in all the tests performed than the control students. The theoretical posttest showed a significant difference between the longitudinal groups, GLC (6.0 ± 1.15) and GLVLO (7.33 ± 1.43). The lower film thickness presented with a significant difference in the VLO groups: (GIC 25 ± 9.3) and GIVLO (16.24 ± 5.17); GLC (50 ± 27.08) and GLVLO (22.5±9.65). The higher setting time occurred in the VLO groups, and the immediate group showed a significant difference (GIC 896 ± 218.90) and GIVLO (1138.5 ± 177.95). CONCLUSIONS: The ZPC manipulated by the students who used the VLO had better mechanical properties in the laboratory tests. Therefore, the groups that used the VLO had clinical handling skills superior to its controls and greater retention of knowledge after 15 days.