초록
Background: The present study aimed to analyze which curriculum is the most relevant to dental hygiene students when they participate in clinical practice in order to provide a useful reference for preparing educational guidance in this field. Method: The survey utilized in the present study consisted of six questions about general characteristics, such as grade, satisfaction with major, amount of clinical practice, period of clinical practice, place of clinical practice, and the most interesting are during clinical practice. When evaluating curriculum relevancy, the following were ranked on a 5-point Likert scale, where 5 = very useful, 4 = comparatively useful, 3 = normal, 2 = comparatively unuseful, 1 = very unuseful: difference in requirements in the field of clinical practice, reason for this difference, and question about the utility of each curriculum. On this scale, higher points implied higher relevance. Result: The highest groups of curricula regarding curriculum utility were as follows: operative dentistry (59.6%), pre-clinical practice (55.2%), dental materials and clinical practice (54.4%), and prosthetic dentistry (49.6%). The lowest groups of curricula regarding curriculum utility were as follows: oral physiology (2.0%), oral histology and embryology (1.6%), and oral microbiology (1.2%). These results imply a lack of connection between the curriculum and tasks in clinical practice. Conclusion: Based on the results of the present study, it appears that both theory and practice courses of the clinical curriculum must be conducted systematically, and that there is a need to conduct education for the fundamental curricula, such as oral physiology, oral histology and embryology, and oral microbiology, regarding the relevance of tasks practiced in clinics.
