Jennie Ross1,2, Sarah R Baker3. 1. Primary Dental Care, Charles Clifford Dental Hospital, Sheffield, UK. 2. Richmond Dental Care, Sheffield, UK. 3. Department of Psychology, Unit of Oral Health, Dentistry and Society, School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: The aim of this service evaluation was to explore the experiences of foundation dentists (FDs) during their dental foundation year (DFT) in the field of oral surgery and surgical extractions. METHODS: A phenomenological approach was taken aiming to explore the FDs' experiences through a qualitative design. All FDs in the region deemed eligible for the evaluation were invited to attend a semi-structured interview or answer a qualitative questionnaire when attending for their exit interview at the completion of DFT. The interviews were then transcribed and thematic analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: 79 FDs took part in the evaluation, representing 86% of trainees eligible for inclusion. Findings showed that not all FDs had the opportunity to undertake surgical extractions independently during the year. Data was analysed and 4 main themes generated when evaluating FDs' experiences; specific learning encounters, influence of the educational supervisor, supportive learning environment and ready for independent practice. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation shows that there are a number of factors associated with FDs' experience during DFT, and not all FDs are leaving the training with a positive experience, with a query as to whether they are fulfilling the aims of training to become an "independent practitioner." It poses questions about what can be done to improve future training and what exactly does DFT need to achieve in terms of experience in surgical extractions.
AIMS: The aim of this service evaluation was to explore the experiences of foundation dentists (FDs) during their dental foundation year (DFT) in the field of oral surgery and surgical extractions. METHODS: A phenomenological approach was taken aiming to explore the FDs' experiences through a qualitative design. All FDs in the region deemed eligible for the evaluation were invited to attend a semi-structured interview or answer a qualitative questionnaire when attending for their exit interview at the completion of DFT. The interviews were then transcribed and thematic analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: 79 FDs took part in the evaluation, representing 86% of trainees eligible for inclusion. Findings showed that not all FDs had the opportunity to undertake surgical extractions independently during the year. Data was analysed and 4 main themes generated when evaluating FDs' experiences; specific learning encounters, influence of the educational supervisor, supportive learning environment and ready for independent practice. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation shows that there are a number of factors associated with FDs' experience during DFT, and not all FDs are leaving the training with a positive experience, with a query as to whether they are fulfilling the aims of training to become an "independent practitioner." It poses questions about what can be done to improve future training and what exactly does DFT need to achieve in terms of experience in surgical extractions.