Maurice J Meade, Xiangqun Ju, David Hunter, Lisa Jamieson
{"title":"A Cross-Sectional Survey of Final Year Dental Students' Opinions on Professionalism and Dental Board of Australia Tribunal Outcomes.","authors":"Maurice J Meade, Xiangqun Ju, David Hunter, Lisa Jamieson","doi":"10.1111/eje.70069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Students undertaking clinical dental training in an educational program in Australia are required to be registered with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and are expected to conform with the professional standards described in the Dental Board of Australia's (DBA) Code of Conduct. The DBA can refer a dentist to a tribunal for alleged professional misconduct. The aim of the study was to survey Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) students at the University of Adelaide (UofA) about their opinions on professionalism and DBA tribunal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-six final year UofA BDS students were invited to participate in a three-part electronic survey. Part 1 concerned respondent demographics. Parts 2 and 3 requested responses to nine statements about professionalism and the outcomes of 10 'real life' DBA tribunal hearings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A response rate of 69.7% (n = 46) was recorded. Eight (17.4%) students were not aware of the DBA's Code of Conduct. Ten (26.3%) responded that being bound by the Code meant they could not fully value the student university experience. DBA outcomes regarding infringement of patient autonomy were considered lenient/very lenient by 59.1% (n = 26) and an outcome regarding an employment dispute harsh/very harsh by 54.5% (n = 24).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The students generally agreed with statements regarding professionalism. Variation in opinion about DBA outcomes was observed. Outcomes regarding infringement of patient autonomy and protection of the dentist title were considered harsh whereas outcomes not otherwise directly related to patient care were considered lenient.</p>","PeriodicalId":50488,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Dental Education","volume":" ","pages":"1142-1151"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13383362/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Dental Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.70069","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Students undertaking clinical dental training in an educational program in Australia are required to be registered with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and are expected to conform with the professional standards described in the Dental Board of Australia's (DBA) Code of Conduct. The DBA can refer a dentist to a tribunal for alleged professional misconduct. The aim of the study was to survey Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) students at the University of Adelaide (UofA) about their opinions on professionalism and DBA tribunal outcomes.
Methods: Sixty-six final year UofA BDS students were invited to participate in a three-part electronic survey. Part 1 concerned respondent demographics. Parts 2 and 3 requested responses to nine statements about professionalism and the outcomes of 10 'real life' DBA tribunal hearings.
Results: A response rate of 69.7% (n = 46) was recorded. Eight (17.4%) students were not aware of the DBA's Code of Conduct. Ten (26.3%) responded that being bound by the Code meant they could not fully value the student university experience. DBA outcomes regarding infringement of patient autonomy were considered lenient/very lenient by 59.1% (n = 26) and an outcome regarding an employment dispute harsh/very harsh by 54.5% (n = 24).
Conclusions: The students generally agreed with statements regarding professionalism. Variation in opinion about DBA outcomes was observed. Outcomes regarding infringement of patient autonomy and protection of the dentist title were considered harsh whereas outcomes not otherwise directly related to patient care were considered lenient.
期刊介绍：
The aim of the European Journal of Dental Education is to publish original topical and review articles of the highest quality in the field of Dental Education. The Journal seeks to disseminate widely the latest information on curriculum development teaching methodologies assessment techniques and quality assurance in the fields of dental undergraduate and postgraduate education and dental auxiliary personnel training. The scope includes the dental educational aspects of the basic medical sciences the behavioural sciences the interface with medical education information technology and distance learning and educational audit. Papers embodying the results of high-quality educational research of relevance to dentistry are particularly encouraged as are evidence-based reports of novel and established educational programmes and their outcomes.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
