The results revealed that the level of knowledge of all students about the dental considerations of systemic diseases is moderate. According to most students, the mentioned subject has moderate to high importance for them. However, most of them do not allocate sufficient time to study this course and are dissatisfied with the way it is taught.
The mean score of students' knowledge of dental considerations for systemic patients was 9.96. According to Ghapanchi et al.'s study, the scoring system in Iran categorizes a score of 0 to 7 out of 20 as weak, 8 to 14 as medium, and 15 to 20 as good. Thus, the level of students' knowledge about the dental management of medically compromised patients in this study is evaluated as medium (
6). These results are consistent with those of studies conducted by Konidena et al. (
1) and Tanveer et al. (
7) on dental students' and dental school employees' knowledge about dental considerations for various systemic diseases, and Narayan et al. (
8) on dental interns’ knowledge about first aid.
A study showed that the main source of knowledge for dentists was their academic studies, not their work experience or post-graduate learning such as retraining courses (
9). Considering that staying away from the academic environment can lead to a loss of knowledge regarding dental considerations for systemic patients (
4), it can be concluded that more effective methods should be used to improve students' knowledge levels.
The mean score of fifth- and sixth-year dentistry students’ knowledge was higher than that of third- and fourth-year students. These results are consistent with those of studies conducted by Konidena et al. (
1) and Tanveer et al. (
7) on dentists' knowledge about dental considerations for various systemic diseases, and Narayan et al. (
8) on dental interns’ knowledge about first aid. The present study revealed that as academic years and the completion of different courses increase, so does the level of students' knowledge about the dental management of medically compromised patients (
Table 1). This aligns with the results of the study by Mojarrad et al. (
10), which showed that dental residents have more knowledge than interns. Al-Mohaissen et al. also showed that the level of knowledge about dental considerations for cardiac patients increases with higher academic degrees (
11). However, since dealing with medically compromised patients and providing services is not restricted to the academic year of students according to the dental curriculum, and a fourth-year dental student may provide dental services to a patient with a systemic problem, it is necessary to include these courses in the initial years of their study.
Rashidi Maybodi et al. (
9) showed that the level of knowledge of dental interns about dental considerations for pregnant women is above moderate and good. This result is not consistent with that of the present study since the former only measured knowledge about one topic, whereas the present study assessed knowledge about various systemic diseases (
Figure 1).
In the present study, the highest correct answer rate was related to the correct antibiotic prophylaxis protocol to prevent bacterial endocarditis, with more than 75% of the students answering correctly. This is consistent with the results of the study by Kumar MP and S (
12), which showed that out of one hundred dentistry students in India, 73% knew the correct guideline for the choice of antibiotic and its dose. GangÁ et al. (
13) in France reported that the level of knowledge of French dentists about infective endocarditis was near 50%. Ryalat et al. from Jordan found that 39% of dentists were unaware of the correct guidelines for patients needing antibiotic prophylaxis, a finding inconsistent with the present study. This discrepancy could be attributed to differences in the study population (students versus dentists) and the study locations (Iran and Jordan) (
14). The guidelines related to antibiotic prophylaxis in heart patients are regularly updated every few years (
8), and frequent training is necessary to learn these changes. However, this may not occur due to the completion of the dentists' education period.
The most frequently incorrect answer in this study was related to diagnosing the symptoms of hypoglycemia in a patient with diabetes mellitus. Khodakarami et al. (
15) showed that the prevalence of diabetes gradually increased from 2004 to 2016 in Iran, reaching about 13%. A significant number of patients are not aware of their disease. Parirokh et al. (
16) also showed that these patients are among the most common who refer to dentists for medical services. Hypoglycemia is considered a type of medical emergency in type 1 diabetes patients. Its symptoms should be identified quickly, and appropriate treatment should be provided to prevent complications. Thus, it is necessary to enhance the knowledge of dentistry students and dentists in this area.
In the thematic classification of the questions, the mean knowledge of the students participating in this study in the HIV area was lower than in cardiovascular areas, medical emergencies, and other systemic diseases (
Figure 1). Only 44% of the students provided correct answers regarding the risk of HIV transmission, while the rest overestimated the transmission risk. Alali et al. (
17) also showed that the level of knowledge of Saudi students about HIV patients is weak, which is consistent with the present study. However, the result of the present study is not consistent with the studies by Singh et al. (
18), Susgun Yildirim, et al. (
19), Grover et al. (
20), and Sufiawati et al. (
21). In all these studies, the knowledge of dentistry students was higher than in the present study. This inconsistency might be due to differences in the study population. In the present study, all pre-clinic, clinic, and intern students were investigated. However, the above-mentioned studies included only either pre-clinic or intern students.
Every curriculum needs to be evaluated to ensure its quality and further improvement. The Kirkpatrick model for evaluating a curriculum includes four levels: Reaction, learning, behavior, and outcomes. These levels evaluate the goals of a curriculum. Monitoring students' reactions to their educational experience is increasingly used in academic centers. It is stated that this initial level of evaluation (reactions) should be an inherent dimension of any curriculum. Students’ satisfaction with a curriculum is the most common evaluation index at the reaction level (
22). Accordingly, we asked the students to state their satisfaction with the way dental management of medically compromised patients is taught. The results showed that 71% of the students were not satisfied with the teaching. Based on our search, no scientific study directly investigates this issue. However, we can refer to the study by Alqarni (
22), who evaluated the satisfaction of students from different educational departments of the Faculty of Dentistry. They showed that students had the lowest level of satisfaction with the transparency of educational goals from the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Diseases (oral medicine), which is in charge of teaching dental considerations for systemic patients. This comparison indicates that the results of the two studies are consistent.
Teaching the dental considerations of systemic patients is a significant part of Iranian faculties of dentistry. After the basic science exam, students get acquainted with this subject and continue learning it until the final year. The current generation of students has a high level of knowledge due to access to various social networks and internet-based educational platforms. Elliott and Healy argue that students are satisfied when their actual experiences meet or exceed their initial expectations. They defined satisfaction as a short-term attitude resulting from an evaluation of a student's educational experience (
23). Dissatisfaction may lead to the non-provision of dental treatment services by these future dentists to medically compromised patients. A survey showed that 83% of students considered their undergraduate training on patients with "special needs" to be poor. When asked about their willingness to treat those people in the future, 50% were not willing to do so (
24).
Dentistry is considered a clinical field, and acquiring sufficient skills and receiving appropriate training is crucial, especially in the field of dental considerations of systemic diseases, as this can improve the level of oral and dental health of patients with systemic diseases. The present study has some limitations. Access to facilities, the performance of lecturers, and the expectations of students may not be the same in different faculties of dentistry. Therefore, it is not possible to generalize the results of this study to all faculties of dentistry. Evaluating the level of knowledge and professional satisfaction of dentists who graduated in previous years about the subject of the study can help us gain a deeper understanding of the effectiveness of training and education in this field and make the curriculum more fruitful.
5.1. Conclusions
Although final-year students exhibited greater knowledge compared to their peers in lower years, overall, students' understanding of the dental considerations related to systemic diseases was deemed average. Additionally, the majority of students expressed dissatisfaction with the teaching approach for this subject.