4.1 Article

Perceived sources of stress amongst dental students: A multicountry study

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DENTAL EDUCATION
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages 258-271

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/eje.12350

Keywords

dental education; dental environment; dental students; stress

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: The aim of this study was to explore the perceived sources of stress reported by dental students from fourteen different countries. Methods: A total of 3568 dental students were recruited from 14 different dental schools. The dental environmental stress (DES) questionnaire was used including 7 domains. Responses to the DES were scored in 4-point Likert scale. Comparison between students was performed according to the study variables. The top 5 stress-provoking questions were identified amongst dental schools. Data were analysed using SPSS software program. Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used as appropriate. Logistic regression analysis was also conducted to determine the effect of the studied variables on the stress domains. The level of statistical significance was set at <.05. Results: Internal consistency of the scale was excellent (0.927). Female students formed the majority of the total student population. The percentage of married students was 4.8%. Numbers of students in pre-clinical and clinical stages were close together. The most stress-provoking domain was workload with a score of 2.05 +/- 0.56. Female students scored higher stress than male students did in most of the domains. Significant differences were found between participating countries in all stress-provoking domains. Dental students from Egypt scored the highest level of stress whilst dental students from Jordan scored the lowest level of stress. Conclusion: The self-reported stress in the dental environment is still high and the stressors seem to be comparable amongst the participating countries. Effective management programmes are needed to minimise dental environment stress.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available