Objective: To investigate the current and future teaching of posterior composite restorations in undergraduate curricula in Malaysian dental schools. Methods: A 24-item validated questionnaire including closed and open questions on the teaching of posterior composites was emailed to faculty members in all 13 Dental Schools in Malaysia. Responses were compiled on Excel and analysed. Results: All 13 dental schools responded to the survey yielding a 100 % response. All schools indicated the use of posterior composites for 2- and 3-surface cavities in premolars and molars. The didactic teaching time devoted to composites was greater than for amalgam (38 h vs 29 h). Clinically, most posterior restorations placed by students were composites (average 74.1 %, range 10 %–100 %); the remaining 25.9 % were amalgams (range, 0 %–50 %). Slot-type cavities were the preparation techniques most commonly taught (n = 11,84.6 %). The use of rubber dam for moisture control was mandatory in most schools (n = 11, 84.6 %). History of adverse reaction to composites was found to be the most common contraindication to composite placement. The phase down of teaching and use of amalgam in Malaysia is expected to occur within the next six years. Conclusion: The trend to increase the teaching of posterior composites reported for other countries is confirmed by the findings from Malaysian dental schools. Notwithstanding this trend, the use of amalgam is still taught, and future studies are required to investigate the implications of the phase down of amalgam in favour of posterior composites. Clinical significance: Notwithstanding the increase in the teaching of posterior composites there is a pressing need to update and refine clinical guidelines for the teaching of posterior composites globally.

Aims: To investigate, using a validated questionnaire, the teaching of removable partial dentures (RPDs) in dental schools of Malaysia. Materials and methods: A validated questionnaire to investigating trends in the teaching of RPDs in dental schools in Oceania was emailed (in English version form) to Heads of Restorative/Prosthodontics/course coordinators in the 13 dental schools in Malaysia. Follow-up reminders were sent and participants were given six weeks to complete and return the questionnaire. Data was entered into an Excel spreadsheet and results compiled and analyzed. Results: Completed questionnaires were received from 13 dental school – a 100% response rate. All schools (n =13) provided a preclinical technical course in RPD design. In most schools (n = 9, 69.2%), course work was supervised by senior lecturers while rest of the institutions made use of associate professor/professors. There were significant differences (p<0.05) between dental schools in terms of the contact hours dedicated to pre-clinical teaching. Students received an average of 62 h of instruction. Didactic instruction was the primary focus with practical (78 h) and didactic teaching (32 h). All dental schools (n = 13) provided practical surveyor design teaching (8 h). The staff student ratio for formal lectures (1:61), tutorials (1:29) and lab demonstrations (1:12) were recorded. Majority of the schools (n = 11, 84.6%) employed paired teaching in clinical sessions. All schools (n = 13, 100%) emphasized on increased teaching of RPD design and prescription writing in future clinical RPD courses. Conclusion: Teaching of RPDs in Malaysia may be considered sufficient and comparable to the teaching in other parts of the world. Clinical significance: Whilst the teaching of partial dentures at Dental Schools in Malaysia provides the core competencies involved in partial denture design and construction based on sound fundamental, scientific prin-ciples they should address the challenges of teaching partial dentures and other areas of dental education including improving working conditions for dental professionals.