Bridging Oral Histology and Maxillofacial Surgery: Dental Students’ Perspectives on Clinical Relevance and Educational Integration

Resumo

Oral Histology and Embryology provide basic knowledge about the structure and development of oral and craniofacial tissues. This knowledge is important for understanding many clinical conditions. However, because oral histology is usually taught during the early years of dental education, students may find it difficult to relate what they learned to later clinical subjects such as Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS). This study aimed to evaluate dental students’ perceptions of the clinical relevance of Oral Histology and Embryology to OMFS and to examine whether these perceptions differed across academic stages. An analytical cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted among 221 undergraduate dental students from the second to fifth academic years at the College of Dentistry, Al-Ahl Al-Bayt University, Iraq. The questionnaire included 14 statements rated on a five-point Likert scale and covered three main areas: histopathological diagnostic integration; clinical, surgical, and developmental applications; and educational integration and curriculum development. Questionnaire reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Data were summarized using frequencies and percentages. Differences between academic stages were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test, followed by Dunn’s post-hoc test with Holm adjustment when required. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The questionnaire showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.755). In general, students had positive perceptions of the clinical relevance of Oral Histology and Embryology, although some differences were found between academic stages. Significant differences were observed for cellular differentiation and the diagnosis of cysts and tumors (H = 13.700, p = 0.008), keratinization and premalignant lesions (H = 17.499, p = 0.004), bone remodeling and resorption (H = 23.876, p < 0.001), craniofacial embryology (H = 12.328, p = 0.015), and salivary gland histology (H = 11.818, p = 0.019). Students also differed significantly in their views regarding the use of clinical case-based learning in Oral Histology teaching (H = 15.056, p = 0.005). No significant differences were found for several other clinical and educational applications. Dental students generally recognized the importance of Oral Histology and Embryology in OMFS education. However, not all subjects or academic levels shared the same perception of the connection between histological knowledge and its clinical application. Students may be better able to connect basic science knowledge to surgical practice if Oral Histology and OMFS are more closely integrated, especially through clinical cases and reinforcement of pertinent histological concepts during the clinical years. To determine whether this strategy enhances clinical performance and knowledge retention, more research is required.