Dental Professionals' Attitudes Toward Treating Patients With Sensory Impairments: A Cross‐Sectional Survey
Amir Laviv, Amichai Dvir, Itzhak Agayev, Michael V. JoachimABSTRACT
Aims
To analyze and compare the attitudes, perceived barriers, and professional confidence of dental students and practicing dentists toward treating patients with sensory impairments, and to examine associations with prior clinical experience and personal connection to disability.
Methods and Results
This cross‐sectional study used a structured questionnaire adapted from validated instruments, with items grouped into three composite indices (Attitudes, Barriers, and Confidence), each scored as the mean of constituent Likert items (Cronbach's α : 0.597, 0.773, and 0.579, respectively). Ninety‐three participants were recruited (46 dental students; 47 practicing dentists). Group comparisons used Mann–Whitney U tests with rank‐biserial correlation ( r ) as the effect size measure and Benjamini–Hochberg false discovery rate correction. Overall, participants reported positive attitudes toward treating patients with sensory impairments. Practitioners reported higher confidence than students ( r = −0.40, p = 0.008) and fewer perceived barriers across several items. Prior clinical experience was associated with higher confidence and fewer barriers regardless of disability type. Experience treating patients with visual impairment showed the broadest pattern—spanning attitudes, barriers, and confidence (all composite p < 0.01, effect sizes r = −0.38 to −0.55)—likely reflecting, at least in part, greater curricular and/or clinical emphasis on visual disability relative to hearing loss in the study setting—though no formal curricular audit was conducted as part of this study, and this interpretation remains speculative pending direct assessment of training exposure. No significant associations were found for gender or personal connection to disability (all p values were FDR‐adjusted).
Conclusion
Clinical experience with patients with sensory impairments is consistently associated with greater preparedness among dental students and practitioners. These findings highlight the value of structured, impairment‐specific clinical training within dental education.