Education in maxillofacial prosthetics

Abstract

I n response to a challenge by the President of the Academy of Maxillofacial Prosthetics, I. Kenneth Adisman, in 1962, a survey was begun to determine the educational status of maxillofacial prosthetics. In September 1966, the report of the Educational Survey Committee of the American Academy of Maxillofacial Prosthetics was published.’ The report proposed that such a survey would be worthwhile because (1) it could reveal the current trends of postdoctoral teaching and curricula, (2) it could suggest aspects of current postdoctoral teaching that need to be strengthened, and (3) the data collected could be a source of information for those seeking further educational opportunities in maxillofacial prosthetics. A summary of survey findings suggested that although progress had been made in developing clinical techniques and materials, significant deficiencies were evident in existing maxillofacial teaching programs. Among the relevant shortcomings were inadequate physical facilities, too few qualified teaching staff personnel, and lack of time in the curricula. The conclusion was that if the quality of teaching staffs and maxillofacial prosthetic education was to advance, those in charge of existing programs must strive for improvement, recognition, and accreditation of the programs. It is appropriate that a decade later the current state of advanced maxillofacial prosthetic education be considered and present trends and means for further advancement be identified.