##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##


Sandra Liliana Castillo Blanco

Liliana Carolina Báez Quintero

Abstract

Antecedentes: diversos estudios han reportado la videoconferencia en línea como una manera de proveer apoyo a la educación en odontología; pero no como la herramienta usada durante una clase totalmente sincrónica. Propósito: establecer la aceptación de los estudiantes al aprendizaje por medio de videoconferencia en línea sincrónica en la especialización en Ortodoncia en la Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia, sede Bogotá. Métodos: se realizó un estudio descriptivo de corte transversal. La muestra (n = 64; n = 62) estuvo conformada por los estudiantes que a la mitad del 2012 habían tomado un semestre en videoconferencia y no más de cuatro semestres de la cátedra de Anomalías Dentomaxilofaciales. Se excluyeron aquellos estudiantes que no aceptaron responder la encuesta, no estuvieron disponibles para diligenciarla o no habían aprobado alguno de los cursos. Resultados: en orden descendente de frecuencia, los estudiantes mostraron estar más de acuerdo con los siguientes factores que evaluaban la importancia del método: actitud del docente: 85,5 %; posibilidad de obtener respuestas como si estuviera en un salón de clase tradicional: 82,3 %; capacidad de estar atento e involucrado con el tema: 67,7 %; capacidad de hacer preguntas como si estuviera en un aula cara a cara de tipo tradicional: 64,5 %. Un 54,1 % estuvo muy de acuerdo en que es una herramienta efectiva para aprender. Solo el 27,9 % reportó estar muy de acuerdo en que es preferible ver la clase en la modalidad tradicional cara a cara. Background: The use of online videoconference in dental education has been reported but it has not been used during a whole term in a synchronic class. Purpose: To establish acceptance of synchronic online videoconference as a teaching method by postdoctoral students of the Department of Orthodontics at Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia, Bogotá campus. Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted. The sample (n = 64; n = 62) consisted of students who in the mid-2012 studied with videoconference at least one semester and no more than four terms of the dentofacial deformities course. Those students who did not want to respond the survey, those who were not available to answer it, or those who failed one of the courses were excluded from the sample. Results: In descending order of importance, the students strongly agreed with the following factors that assessed the acceptance of the method: Professor´s attitude, 85.5%; possibility to obtain answers to their questions as being in a traditional classroom, 82.3%; ability to be attentive and involved during the videoconference, 67.7%; and ability to ask questions as being face to face, 64.5%. 54.1% of the students strongly agreed with the affirmation that the synchronic online videoconference is an effective learning tool. Only 27.9% strongly agreed responding that they preferred the traditional face to face learning.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords
References
1. Scarbecz M, Russell CK, Shreve RG, Robinson MM, Scheid CR. Faculty development to improve teaching at a health sciences center: a needs assessment. J Dent Educ. 2011 Feb; 75(2): 145-59.
2. Ruiz-Parra AI, Angel-Müller E, Guevara O. La simulación y el aprendizaje virtual. Tecnologías complementarias para la educación médica. Rev Fac Med Unal. 2009 Ene-Mar; 57(1): 67-79.
3. Costa JB, Peres HHC, Rogenski NMB, Baptista CMC. Proposta educacional on-line sobre úlcera por pressão para alunos e profissionais de enfermagem. Acta Paul Enferm. 2009; 22(5): 607-11.
4. Retrouvey JM, Finkelstein AB. Blended learning in orthodontic diagnosis: an interactive approach. J Can Dent Assoc. 2008 Sep; 74(7): 645-9.
5. Al-Riyami S, Moles DR, Leeson R, Cunningham SJ. Comparison of the instructional efficacy of an internet-based temporomandibular joint (TMJ) tutorial with a traditional seminar. Br Dent J. 2010 Dec 11; 209(11): 571-6.
6. Kleinert HL, Sanders C, Mink J, Nash D, Johnson J, Boyd S, Challman S. Improving student dentist competencies and perception of difficulty in delivering care to children with developmental disabilities using a virtual patient module. J Dent Educ. 2007 Feb; 71(2): 279-86.
7. Berman N, Fall LH, Smith S, Levine DA, Maloney CG, Potts M, Siegel B, Foster-Johnson L. Integration strategies for using virtual patients in clinical clerkships. Acad Med. 2009 Jul; 84(7): 942-9.
8. Buchanan JA. Experience with virtual reality-based technology in teaching restorative dental procedures. J Dent Educ. 2004 Dec; 68(12): 1258-65.
9. Gal GB, Weiss EI, Gafni N, Ziv A. Preliminary assessment of faculty and student perception of a haptic virtual reality simulator for training dental manual dexterity. J Dent Educ. 2011 Apr; 75(4): 496-504.
10. Suebnukarn S, Haddawy P, Rhienmora P, Jittimanee P, Viratket P. Augmented kinematic feedback from haptic virtual reality for dental skill acquisition. J Dent Educ. 2010 Dec; 74(12): 1357-66.
11. Steinberg AD, Bashook PG, Drummond J, Ashrafi S, Zefran M. Assessment of faculty perception of content validity of PerioSim, a haptic-3D virtual reality dental training simulator. J Dent Educ. 2007 Dec; 71(12): 1574-82.
12. Marras I, Nikolaidis N, Mikrogeorgis G, Lyroudia K, Pitas I. A virtual system for cavity preparation in endodontics. J Dent Educ. 2008 Apr; 72(4): 494-502.
13. Pohlenz P, Gröbe A, Petersik A, von Sternberg N, Pflesser B, Pommert A, Höhne KH, Tiede U, Springer I, Heiland M. Virtual dental surgery as a new educational tool in dental school. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2010 Dec; 38(8): 560-4.
14. Jackson. TH, Hannum WH, Koroluk L, Proffit WR. Effectiveness of web based teaching modules test-enhanced learning in dental education. J Dental Educ. 2011 Jun; 75(6): 775-81.
15. Klein KP, Hannum WH, Fields WH, Proffit WR. Interactive distance learning for orthodontic residency programs: Problems and potential solutions. J Dental Educ. 2012 Mar; 76(3): 322-9.
16. Klein KP, Hannum WH, Fields WH, Proffit WR. Interactive distance learning for orthodontic residency programs: Utilization and acceptability. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012 Mar; 141(3): 378-85.
17. Nurko C, Proffit W. Acceptability and perceived effectiveness of web-based self-instruction in clinical orthodontics. Angle Orthod. 2005; 75(4): 521-5.
18. Bednar E, Wallace M, Hannum, Firestone, Silveira, Cox, William R. Proffit. Application of distance learning to interactive seminar instruction in orthodontic residency programs. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007 Nov; 132(5): 586-94.
19. Miller, Hannum WH, Proffit W. Recorded interactive seminars and follow-up discussions as an effective method for distance learning. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2011 Mar; 139(3): 412-6.
20. Odell EW, Francis CA, Eaton KA, Reynolds PA, Mason RD. A study of videoconferencing for postgraduate continuing education in dentistry in the UK. The teachers’ view. Eur J Dent Educ. 2001 Aug; 5(3): 113-9.
21. Feeney L, Reynolds PA, Eaton KA, Harper J. A description of the new technologies used in transforming dental education. Br Dent J. 2008 Jan 12; 204(1): 19-28.
22. Cook J, Austen G, Stephens C. Videoconferencing: what are the benefits for dental practice. Br Dent J. 2000 Jan 22; 188(2): 67-70.
23. Reynolds PA, Eaton KA, Mason R. Seeing is believing: Dental education benefits from developments in videoconferencing. Br Dent J. 2008 Jan 26; 204(2): 87-92.
24. Allen M, Sargeant J, MacDougall E, Proctor-Simms M. Videoconferencing for continuing medical education: from pilot project to sustained programme. J Telemed Telecare. 2002; 8(3): 131-7.
25. Johnson CG. Lessons learned from teaching web-based courses: the 7-year itch. Nurs Forum. 2005 Jan-Mar; 40(1): 11-7.
26. Sieber JE. Misconceptions and realities about teaching on line. Sci Eng Ethics. 2005 Jul; 11(3): 329-40.
27. Castillo SL. Videoconferencia en línea como herramienta de enseñanza de anomalías dentomaxilofaciales a residentes de ortodoncia. Una narración académica docente. Univ Odontol. 2012 Jul-Dic; 31(67): 105-10.
28. Hernandez B, Velasco-Mondragón HE. Encuestas transversales. Salud Publ Mex. 2000; 42(5): 447-55.
29. Garrido F, López S. Diseño de estudios epidemiológicos. Salud Publ Mex. 2000; 42(2): 144-54.
30. Linjawi AL, Hamdan AM, Perryer DG, Walmsley AD. Students’ attitudes towards an on-line orthodontic learning resource. Eur J Dent Educ. 2009 May; 13(2): 87-92.
31. Pahinis K, Stokes CW, Walsh TF, Tsitrou E, Cannavina G. A blended learning course taught to different groups of learners in a dental school: follow-up evaluation. J Dent Educ. 2008 Sep; 72(9): 1048-57.
32. A-Jewair TS, Azarpazhooh A, Suri S, Shah PS. Computer-assisted learning in orthodontic education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Educ. 2009 Jun; 73(6): 730-9.
33. Martin N, Martínez Lazalde O, Stokes C, Romano D. An evaluation of remote communication versus face to face in clinical dental education. Br Dent J. 2012 Mar 23; 212(6): 277-82.
34. Qualter J, Sculli F, Oliker A, Napier Z, Lee S, Garcia J, Frenkel S, Harnik V, Triola M. The biodigital human: a web-based 3D platform for medical visualization and education. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012; 173: 359-61.
35. Castillo SL. Factores que se deben considerar al implementar estrategias de educación virtual en odontología. Univ Odontol. 2011 Jul-Dic; 30(65): 97-103.
36. Moazami F, Bahrampour E, Azar MR, Jahedi F, Moattari M. Comparing two methods of education (virtual vs. traditional) on learning of Iranian dental students: A post-test only design study. BMC Medical Educ. 2014 Mar 5; 14: 45.
How to Cite
Castillo Blanco, S., & Báez Quintero, L. (2015). Aceptación de la videoconferencia en línea sincrónica como método de enseñanza entre estudiantes de ortodoncia / Acceptance of Synchronic Online Videoconference as a Teaching Method by Postdoctoral Residents in Orthodontics. Universitas Odontologica, 33(71), 108-116. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.uo33-71.avls
Section
Dental Education
Most read articles by the same author(s)