Defense Date
2026
Document Type
Thesis
Degree Name
Master of Science in Dentistry
Department
Dentistry
First Advisor
Carol Caudill
Second Advisor
Caroline Carrico
Third Advisor
Alexandra Glickman
Abstract
A COMPARISON OF VIDEO-BASED AND SLIDE-BASED DEMONSTRATONS BEFORE HANDS-ON PULPOTOMY PROCEDURE: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
By: Fatemah Almaqate, DMD
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Dentistry at Virginia Commonwealth University.
Virginia Commonwealth University, May 2026
Thesis Advisor: Carol A. Caudill, D.D.S., M.Ed.
Pediatric Dentistry
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare a video‑based demonstration with traditional slide‑based teaching prior to practicing pulpotomy on primary teeth in the simulation laboratory, and to determine whether the video‑based approach improved the preclinical performance of dental students. The study also evaluated students’ knowledge, understanding of the rationale and the steps of the procedure, self-efficacy, and likelihood of using the demonstration in the future.
Methods: A randomized, double‑blinded, parallel‑group study was conducted with 79 second‑year dental students enrolled in a pediatric dentistry course. Students were randomized to a video‑based demonstration group (VG) or a slide‑based demonstration group (SG). All students received identical laboratory guides, assessment forms, and questionnaires administered before the demonstration, after the demonstration, and after the simulation lab exercise. Students performed a primary tooth pulpotomy independently, and calibrated evaluators assessed their preparations using a standardized rubric. Statistical analyses included chi‑square tests, Fisher’s exact tests, McNemar’s test, and Cohen’s kappa for inter‑rater reliability.
Results: Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. After the demonstration, VG participants were more likely to strongly agree that they understood how to perform a pulpotomy (36% vs. 13%) and that the demonstration clearly showed procedural steps (56% vs. 20%). Despite these perceptual advantages, no significant differences were observed between groups in lab performance for access preparation (p=0.5408) or simulated pulp removal (p=0.5839). Two SG students required remediation, compared with none in VG. Knowledge scores improved significantly from baseline to both pre-lab and post‑lab assessments (p< 0.0001), with no significant differences between groups.
Conclusion: Video‑based demonstrations enhanced students’ perceived understanding and clarity of procedural steps compared with slide‑based instruction. However, these perceived benefits did not translate into measurable differences in preclinical performance. Both instructional methods supported gains in procedural knowledge. Video‑based demonstrations represent a valuable adjunct to traditional teaching, particularly for learners who benefit from dynamic visual representation of clinical procedures.
Rights
© Fatemah Almaqate
Is Part Of
VCU University Archives
Is Part Of
VCU Theses and Dissertations
Date of Submission
4-30-2026
Included in
Dental Public Health and Education Commons, Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons, Educational Methods Commons, Pediatric Dentistry and Pedodontics Commons