Aging and Disability Simulation in Dental Education: A Mixed‐Methods Evaluation of Student Perceptions

ABSTRACT Introduction As global populations age, dental professionals must be better prepared to meet the complex needs of older adults and individuals with disabilities. This mixed‐methods study examined whether participation in an ageing and disability simulation curriculum was associated with changes in dental students' self‐reported awareness, confidence, and reflective understanding. Method Third‐year students at a U.S. dental school participated in a required geriatric rotation; 226 completed the pre‐intervention survey, 231 the post‐intervention survey, and 219 provided matched responses for paired analyses. The two half‐day curriculum included immersive simulations of physical, sensory, and cognitive challenges, asynchronous modules, and an interdisciplinary case‐based discussion. Likert‐scale surveys assessed awareness, attitudes, and confidence immediately before and after the curriculum; open‐ended responses were analysed thematically. Results Significant pre‐ to post‐intervention differences were observed across most measured domains ( p < 0.001), including self‐reported awareness of age‐ and disability‐related challenges and confidence in communicating with, assessing, and adapting care for patients with disabilities. Perceptions of whether dental practices adequately accommodate individuals with disabilities did not change significantly ( p = 0.084), although responses shifted toward greater disagreement. Qualitative themes included empathy and understanding of patient experience, person‐centred and adaptable care, and interprofessional collaboration. Conclusion Participation was associated with increased self‐reported awareness and confidence and reflections emphasising patient experience, individualised care, and interprofessional collaboration. These findings do not establish improved clinical competence or sustained changes in practice. Studies incorporating objective performance measures and longitudinal follow‐up are needed to determine whether perceived gains translate into demonstrable changes in patient care.