Tooth ExtractionOSCENCT07664917
The Impact of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination
An observational study of Tooth Extraction and Education, run by Kırıkkale University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This study aims to compare two different educational and assessment approaches used for teaching pre-extraction clinical evaluation skills to undergraduate dental students. Before performing a simple tooth extraction, students are expected to obtain a medical history, identify systemic risk factors, determine… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 25 weeksHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Tooth Extraction, Education, OSCE (Objective Structured Clinical Examination)
- How many people
- 104 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 20 Feb 2026to 4 May 2026
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 25 weeks
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child
Study population: This study was conducted as a prospective randomized controlled study to evaluate the skills of 4th-year students at Faculty of Dentistry regarding a clinical case with an indication for simple tooth extraction. The study population consisted of 4th-year students at Faculty of Dentistry who had received theoretical and practical training on tooth extraction within the scope of the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery course.
Who may be able to join
- Fourth-year student enrolled in the Faculty of Dentistry.
- Completion of theoretical and practical training in tooth extraction.
- Age 18-25 years.
- Voluntary agreement to participate and provision of informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Enrollment in an academic year other than the fourth year or at another university.
- Refusal to participate or withdrawal of informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Kırıkkale University Faculty of Dentistry
Kirikkale, Yahşihan, 71450
About this study
Official title: The Impact of OSCE on Clinical Competence, Anxiety, and Educational Satisfaction in Dental Students
This study aims to compare two different educational and assessment approaches used for teaching pre-extraction clinical evaluation skills to undergraduate dental students. Before performing a simple tooth extraction, students are expected to obtain a medical history, identify systemic risk factors, determine extraction indications, communicate effectively with patients, and make appropriate clinical decisions.
Participants will be assigned to either an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)-based educational approach or a traditional teaching and assessment approach. Students' clinical performance, communication skills, clinical reasoning abilities, learning satisfaction, self-confidence, and examination-related anxiety will be evaluated and compared between groups.
The findings of this study are expected to provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of OSCE in undergraduate dental education and contribute to the development of more effective training and assessment strategies for clinical competency acquisition.
Read the detailed description
Simple tooth extraction is one of the most frequently performed procedures in dental practice. Although the technical aspects of extraction are important, successful patient management requires accurate medical history taking, identification of systemic risk factors, appropriate treatment planning, clinical decision-making, and effective communication with patients. Deficiencies in these competencies may adversely affect patient safety and treatment outcomes.
Traditional educational approaches in dental schools primarily focus on theoretical knowledge and may not adequately provide opportunities for students to demonstrate and apply their knowledge in realistic clinical scenarios. Consequently, variations may occur among students regarding diagnostic reasoning, risk assessment, communication skills, and clinical decision-making.
The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a structured and standardized assessment method widely used in health professions education. OSCE enables students to demonstrate clinical competencies through scenario-based stations that simulate real-life patient encounters. Previous studies have shown that OSCE can improve students' clinical performance, decision-making abilities, and educational satisfaction while providing a more objective assessment of clinical competence. However, concerns regarding examination-related anxiety and the resource-intensive nature of OSCE remain subjects of ongoing investigation.
The present study aims to compare an OSCE-based educational and assessment model with a traditional teaching and assessment approach in the context of pre-extraction clinical evaluation. The educational content focuses on competencies required before performing a simple tooth extraction, including patient history taking, identification of systemic conditions that may affect treatment, determination of extraction indications, patient communication, informed consent procedures, and clinical reasoning.
Students participating in the study will receive training according to their assigned educational method. Following the educational intervention, participants will be evaluated using standardized assessment tools. Primary outcomes will include measures of clinical competency and performance related to pre-extraction patient evaluation. Secondary outcomes will include learning satisfaction, self-confidence in learning, and examination-related anxiety.
By examining both educational effectiveness and learner perceptions, this study seeks to determine whether OSCE-based training offers advantages over traditional educational approaches in developing clinical competencies required for safe and effective dental practice. The findings may contribute to evidence-based improvements in undergraduate dental curricula and provide additional data regarding the implementation of OSCE in dental education programs.
- Keywords
- tooth extraction, education, OSCE
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Students assessed in the OSCE laboratory | |
| Group 2 | Students assessed using the traditional method |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Primary Outcome Measure
Title: Clinical performance score
Description:
Clinical performance will be evaluated immediately after the assessment using the Global Rating Scale (GRS). The GRS assesses history taking, risk assessment, clinical reasoning, decision-making, patient communication, and overall clinical competence. Scores range from 1 to 5 for each domain, with higher scores indicating better clinical performance.
Time Frame:
Immediately after assessment (Day 1)
Measured: 1. day
State anxiety level
State anxiety will be measured before and after the assessment using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory - State Form (STAI-I). Total scores range from 20 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater state anxiety.
Measured: Immediately before and immediately after assessment (Day 1)
Student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning
Student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning will be evaluated immediately after the educational intervention using the Turkish version of the 12-item Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale. The scale consists of 12 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale, with total scores ranging from 12 to 60. Higher scores indicate greater student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning.
Measured: Immediately after the educational intervention (Day 1)
Secondary outcomes (1)
Secondary Outcome Measure
Knowledge retention will be assessed 2 weeks after the educational intervention using the Global Rating Scale (GRS). Students will evaluate a standardized clinical case similar to that used during training. The GRS rates each domain on a 5-point scale (1 = lowest performance, 5 = highest performance). Higher scores indicate better knowledge retention.
Measured: 2 weeks after the educational intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Jun 2026
- Study start20 Feb 2026
- Primary completion1 Apr 2026
- Study completion4 May 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Tooth ExtractionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 104 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Kırıkkale University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Elif Çoban, Kırıkkale University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07664917
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Decision No: 2026.02.04
- Acronym
- OSCE
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 12 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 24 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: De-identified individual participant data, including demographic characteristics, Global Rating Scale (GRS) scores, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-I) scores, Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale scores, and knowledge retention assessment results, will be available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author following publication of the study results.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Impact of OSCE on Clinical Competence, Anxiety, and Educational Satisfaction in Dental Students
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07664917
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- OSCE / Decision No: 2026.02.04
- Keywords
- tooth extraction, education, OSCE
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 104 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Kırıkkale UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 20 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Apr 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 4 May 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to compare two different educational and assessment approaches used for teaching pre-extraction clinical evaluation skills to undergraduate dental students. Before performing a simple tooth extraction, students are expected to obtain a medical history, identify systemic risk factors, determine extraction indications, communicate effectively with patients, and make appropriate clinical decisions.
Participants will be assigned to either an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)-based educational approach or a traditional teaching and assessment approach. Students' clinical performance, communication skills, clinical reasoning abilities, learning satisfaction, self-confidence, and examination-related anxiety will be evaluated and compared between groups.
The findings of this study are expected to provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of OSCE in undergraduate dental education and contribute to the development of more effective training and assessment strategies for clinical competency acquisition.
Detailed description
Simple tooth extraction is one of the most frequently performed procedures in dental practice. Although the technical aspects of extraction are important, successful patient management requires accurate medical history taking, identification of systemic risk factors, appropriate treatment planning, clinical decision-making, and effective communication with patients. Deficiencies in these competencies may adversely affect patient safety and treatment outcomes.
Traditional educational approaches in dental schools primarily focus on theoretical knowledge and may not adequately provide opportunities for students to demonstrate and apply their knowledge in realistic clinical scenarios. Consequently, variations may occur among students regarding diagnostic reasoning, risk assessment, communication skills, and clinical decision-making.
The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a structured and standardized assessment method widely used in health professions education. OSCE enables students to demonstrate clinical competencies through scenario-based stations that simulate real-life patient encounters. Previous studies have shown that OSCE can improve students' clinical performance, decision-making abilities, and educational satisfaction while providing a more objective assessment of clinical competence. However, concerns regarding examination-related anxiety and the resource-intensive nature of OSCE remain subjects of ongoing investigation.
The present study aims to compare an OSCE-based educational and assessment model with a traditional teaching and assessment approach in the context of pre-extraction clinical evaluation. The educational content focuses on competencies required before performing a simple tooth extraction, including patient history taking, identification of systemic conditions that may affect treatment, determination of extraction indications, patient communication, informed consent procedures, and clinical reasoning.
Students participating in the study will receive training according to their assigned educational method. Following the educational intervention, participants will be evaluated using standardized assessment tools. Primary outcomes will include measures of clinical competency and performance related to pre-extraction patient evaluation. Secondary outcomes will include learning satisfaction, self-confidence in learning, and examination-related anxiety.
By examining both educational effectiveness and learner perceptions, this study seeks to determine whether OSCE-based training offers advantages over traditional educational approaches in developing clinical competencies required for safe and effective dental practice. The findings may contribute to evidence-based improvements in undergraduate dental curricula and provide additional data regarding the implementation of OSCE in dental education programs.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | – | –Students assessed in the OSCE laboratory |
| Group 2 | – | –Students assessed using the traditional method |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 25 weeks
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child
- Study population
- This study was conducted as a prospective randomized controlled study to evaluate the skills of 4th-year students at Faculty of Dentistry regarding a clinical case with an indication for simple tooth extraction. The study population consisted of 4th-year students at Faculty of Dentistry who had received theoretical and practical training on tooth extraction within the scope of the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery course.
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Fourth-year student enrolled in the Faculty of Dentistry.
- Completion of theoretical and practical training in tooth extraction.
- Age 18-25 years.
- Voluntary agreement to participate and provision of informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Enrollment in an academic year other than the fourth year or at another university.
- Refusal to participate or withdrawal of informed consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Primary Outcome Measure
Time frame: 1. day
Title: Clinical performance score Description: Clinical performance will be evaluated immediately after the assessment using the Global Rating Scale (GRS). The GRS assesses history taking, risk assessment, clinical reasoning, decision-making, patient communication, and overall clinical competence. Scores range from 1 to 5 for each domain, with higher scores indicating better clinical performance. Time Frame: Immediately after assessment (Day 1)
State anxiety level
Time frame: Immediately before and immediately after assessment (Day 1)
State anxiety will be measured before and after the assessment using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory - State Form (STAI-I). Total scores range from 20 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater state anxiety.
Student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning
Time frame: Immediately after the educational intervention (Day 1)
Student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning will be evaluated immediately after the educational intervention using the Turkish version of the 12-item Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale. The scale consists of 12 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale, with total scores ranging from 12 to 60. Higher scores indicate greater student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning.
1 secondary outcome
Secondary Outcome Measure
Time frame: 2 weeks after the educational intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Jun 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. De-identified individual participant data, including demographic characteristics, Global Rating Scale (GRS) scores, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-I) scores, Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale scores, and knowledge retention assessment results, will be available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author following publication of the study results.
Related trials for Tooth Extraction
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Melatonin in Posterior Mandible Extraction Socket
Bone Loss
RecruitingPhase 4
Hematological Safety of Dipyrone Versus Paracetamol After Dental Extractions
Hematologic Test, Agranulocytosis
Active, not recruiting
L-PRF Block vs Composite Graft for Horizontal Ridge Augmentation
Alveolar Ridge Resorption After Extraction, Alveolar Bone Loss
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Ascorbic Acid-Loaded I-PRF With Partially Demineralized Dentin Graft on Alveolar Ridge Preservation
Alveolar Ridge Preservation Post-Extraction Bone Healing Dental Implant Site Development Tooth Loss, Alveolar Bone Regeneration Following Odontectomy
Recruiting
Assessment of the Locally Administrated Vitamin D3 and Corticision Efficacy on Orthodontic Canine Retraction
Malocclusions, Canine Retraction
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Tooth Extraction and Education, run by Kırıkkale University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Primary Outcome Measure (time frame: 1. day). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Jun 2026.