| Literature DB >> 32345306 |
Martin M Fu1, Rebecca Y Chen1,2, Huan-Chen Kao3, Chi-Hsien Wang3, Hsun-Liang Chan4, Earl Fu5, Tony Szu-Hsien Lee6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Each year, more than 200 international dental graduates start U.S. specialty trainings to become specialists. It is unknown if their life satisfaction is associated with any dental career-related factor before residencies (e.g. dental school class rank, research experience, or private practice experience) and after residencies (e.g. staying in the U.S., teaching status, workplace, or board certification). This cross-sectional study aimed to identify these potential factors by surveying Taiwanese dental graduates who pursued U.S. residencies.Entities:
Keywords: Dental residency; Dental specialties; Foreign professional personnel; Graduate dental education; Satisfaction
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32345306 PMCID: PMC7189433 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02032-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Mean and Standard Deviation (SD) of SWLS by background of 158 participants
| Specialists / Former Residents | Current Residents | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | SWLS | % | SWLS | |||||||||
| Gender | 0.095 | 0.995 | 0.916 | 0.346 | ||||||||
| Male | 76 | 60.8% | 4.11 | 0.69 | 9 | 27.3% | 3.44 | 0.50 | ||||
| Female | 49 | 39.2% | 4.11 | 0.70 | 24 | 72.7% | 3.71 | 0.76 | ||||
| Dental School Class Rank | 2.182 | 0.094 | 3.868 | 0.020* | ||||||||
| Top 25% | 92 | 73.6% | 4.11 | 0.65 | 24 | 72.7% | 3.75 | 0.61 | ||||
| 26 to 50% | 16 | 12.8% | 4.37 | 0.72 | 5 | 15.2% | 3.72 | 0.78 | ||||
| 51 to 75% | 4 | 3.2% | 4.45 | 0.64 | 2 | 6.1% | 2.30 | 0.42 | ||||
| Bottom 25% | 7 | 5.6% | 3.68 | 0.40 | 1 | 3.0% | 2.80 | |||||
| Missing | 6 | 4.8% | 1 | 3.0% | ||||||||
| Specialty | 2.293 | 0.063 | 0.305 | 0.872 | ||||||||
| Periodontics | 54 | 43.2% | 3.95 | 0.67 | 12 | 36.4% | 3.73 | 0.82 | ||||
| Prosthodontics | 20 | 16.0% | 4.20 | 0.68 | 11 | 33.3% | 3.60 | 0.73 | ||||
| Pediatric Dentistry | 21 | 16.8% | 4.05 | 0.75 | 3 | 9.1% | 3.67 | 0.41 | ||||
| Orthodontics | 14 | 11.2% | 4.21 | 0.65 | 3 | 9.1% | 3.80 | 0.72 | ||||
| Endodontics | 16 | 12.8% | 4.50 | 0.66 | 4 | 12.1% | 3.30 | 0.62 | ||||
| Clinical Training in Taiwan before Residency | 0.066 | 0.797 | 2.238 | 0.145 | ||||||||
| No | 89 | 71.2% | 4.14 | 0.68 | 22 | 66.7% | 3.77 | 0.76 | ||||
| Yes | 32 | 25.6% | 4.11 | 0.61 | 11 | 33.3% | 3.38 | 0.51 | ||||
| Missing | 4 | 3.2% | ||||||||||
| U.S. DDS/DMD before Residency | 0.789 | 0.376 | 0.269 | 0.608 | ||||||||
| No | 111 | 88.8% | 4.10 | 0.66 | 32 | 97.0% | 3.63 | 0.71 | ||||
| Yes | 11 | 8.8% | 4.29 | 0.89 | 1 | 3.0% | 4.00 | |||||
| Missing | 3 | 2.4% | ||||||||||
| Residency Started in | 4.870 | 0.009** | 0.027 | 0.974 | ||||||||
| 0 ~ 4 years after dental school | 84 | 67.2% | 4.19 | 0.65 | 0.029* | 20 | 60.6% | 3.66 | 0.69 | |||
| 5 ~ 9 years after dental school | 33 | 26.4% | 3.84 | 0.73 | 11 | 33.3% | 3.60 | 0.81 | ||||
| ≥10 years after dental school | 7 | 5.6% | 4.54 | 0.51 | 0.032* | 2 | 6.1% | 3.60 | 0.57 | |||
| Missing | 1 | 0.8% | ||||||||||
| Year Residency Started | 4.098 | 0.008** | ||||||||||
| 1976 to 1985 | 22 | 17.6% | 4.36 | 0.77 | 0.013* | |||||||
| 1986 to 1995 | 36 | 28.8% | 4.23 | 0.61 | ||||||||
| 1996 to 2005 | 28 | 22.4% | 4.15 | 0.66 | 0.036* | |||||||
| 2006 to now | 39 | 31.2% | 3.81 | 0.67 | 33 | 100% | 3.64 | 0.70 | ||||
| Research Experience before U.S. Residency | 3.023 | 0.085 | 0.320 | 0.576 | ||||||||
| No | 81 | 64.8% | 4.06 | 0.69 | 26 | 78.8% | 3.60 | 0.70 | ||||
| Yes | 39 | 31.2% | 4.29 | 0.58 | 7 | 21.2% | 3.77 | 0.74 | ||||
| Missing | 5 | 4.0% | ||||||||||
| Private Practice Experience before U.S. Residency | 7.816 | 0.006** | 0.053 | 0.819 | ||||||||
| No | 28 | 22.4% | 4.41 | 0.54 | 10 | 30.3% | 3.68 | 0.64 | ||||
| Yes | 91 | 72.8% | 4.02 | 0.67 | 23 | 69.7% | 3.62 | 0.74 | ||||
| Missing | 6 | 4.8% | ||||||||||
| Total | 125 | 4.11 | 0.69 | 33 | 3.64 | 0.70 | ||||||
SWLS Mean Score = (Item 1 + item 2 + Item 3 + item 4 + Item 5)/5
T-tests and one way analysis of variance with post hoc Tukey HSD test were performed on all participants to compare means of two groups and more than two groups respectively. Missing values were deleted from analysis. *p < 0.05; **p < 0 .01
Mean and SD of SWLS by current teaching status, practice setting, and board certification of 125 specialists
| % | SWLS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Country | 0.268 | 0.605 | ||||
| Practice in the U.S. | 63 | 50.4% | 4.13 | 0.72 | ||
| Practice in Taiwan | 61 | 48.8% | 4.07 | 0.67 | ||
| Elsewhere | 1 | 0.8% | ||||
| Current Teaching Status | 1.445 | 0.233 | ||||
| Full Time | 34 | 27.2% | 4.29 | 0.65 | ||
| Paid Part Time | 20 | 16.0% | 4.25 | 0.52 | ||
| Unpaid Part Time | 21 | 16.8% | 4.00 | 0.74 | ||
| No Teaching | 44 | 35.2% | 4.04 | 0.69 | ||
| Missing | 6 | 4.8% | ||||
| Current Major Workplace | 0.171 | 0.843 | ||||
| Private Practice | 59 | 47.2% | 4.11 | 0.69 | ||
| Hospital/School | 46 | 36.8% | 4.10 | 0.65 | ||
| Both Private & Hospital/School | 16 | 12.8% | 4.16 | 0.58 | ||
| Missing | 4 | 3.2% | ||||
| American Board Certification | 0.714 | 0.400 | ||||
| Board Certified | 58 | 46.4% | 4.19 | 0.66 | ||
| Board Eligible | 62 | 49.6% | 4.09 | 0.67 | ||
| Missing | 5 | 4.0% | ||||
| Total | 125 | 4.11 | 0.69 | |||
One way ANOVA was performed on all participants to compare means of between groups. Missing values were deleted from analysis
Fig. 1Means of SWLS by specialties and current location of 125 specialists. Endo = Endodontics; Pedo = Pediatric Dentistry; Ortho = Orthodontics; Prostho = Prosthodontics; Perio = Periodontics. p < 0.05; **p < 0 .01
Results of multivariable adjusted generalized linear model analysis of specialists: aspects of SWLS Mean Score
| Intercept | % | B | 95% CI | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 116 | 3.410 | 2.886 | 3.934 | 0.000** | ||
| Specialty | 0.026* | |||||
| Prosthodontics | 20 | 17.2% | 0.173 | −0.128 | 0.473 | 0.261 |
| Orthodontics | 13 | 11.2% | 0.196 | −0.176 | 0.569 | 0.301 |
| Pediatric Dentistry | 20 | 17.2% | −0.056 | −0.362 | 0.251 | 0.721 |
| Endodontics | 13 | 11.2% | 0.634 | 0.272 | 0.995 | 0.001** |
| Periodontics | 50 | 43.1% | Referent | . | . | – |
| US Residency Started | 0.004** | |||||
| 0 to 4 years after Graduation | 82 | 70.7% | 0.430 | 0.154 | 0.706 | 0.002** |
| ≥10 years after Graduation | 6 | 5.2% | 0.203 | −0.352 | 0.758 | 0.473 |
| 5 to 9 years after Graduation | 28 | 24.1% | Referent | . | . | – |
| Year Residency Started | 0.029* | |||||
| 1976 to 1985 | 20 | 17.2% | 0.377 | 0.066 | 0.687 | 0.017* |
| 1986 to 1995 | 33 | 28.4% | 0.427 | 0.139 | 0.716 | 0.004* |
| 1996 to 2005 | 27 | 23.3% | 0.238 | −0.061 | 0.537 | 0.119 |
| 2006 to now | 36 | 31.0% | Referent | . | . | – |
| Class Rank in Dental School | 0.058 | |||||
| Top 25% | 89 | 76.7% | 0.271 | −0.170 | 0.711 | 0.219 |
| 26 to 50% | 16 | 13.8% | 0.556 | 0.051 | 1.060 | 0.031* |
| 51 to 75% | 4 | 3.4% | 0.285 | −0.436 | 1.007 | 0.438 |
| Bottom 25% | 7 | 6.0% | Referent | . | . | – |
| Research Experience | 0.012* | |||||
| No | 80 | 69.2% | −0.295 | −0.539 | −0.051 | 0.012* |
| Yes | 36 | 30.8% | Referent | – | ||
| Private Practice Experience | 0.397 | |||||
| No | 28 | 23.9% | 0.099 | −0.170 | 0.368 | 0.397 |
| Yes | 88 | 76.1% | Referent | – | ||
| American Board Certification | 0.279 | |||||
| Board Eligible | 60 | 52.1% | −0.127 | −0.367 | 0.113 | 0.279 |
| Board Certified | 56 | 47.9% | Referent | – | ||
| Current Country | 0.823 | |||||
| Practice in Taiwan | 59 | 50.4% | 0.025 | −0.193 | 0.242 | 0.823 |
| Practice in the U.S. | 57 | 49.6% | Referent | – | ||
B unstandardized beta, SE B standard error for the unstandardized beta; the adjusted variables listed in the table
p < 0.05; **p < 0 .01
Fig. 2Relationship between dental school class rank and American board certification of 120 specialists. SWLS Mean Score = (Item 1 + item 2 + Item 3 + item 4 + Item 5)/5. One way ANOVA and independent T-test were performed on all participants to compare means of between groups. p < 0.05; **p < 0 .01. Group of 26 to 50% and Group of 26 to 50% were combined due to lack of enough sample for analysis