METHODS: An extensive literature review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) method. This study was systematically performed in six electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, and EBSCO). The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tools using RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I.
RESULTS: PICOS criteria were formulated for study inclusion. The bibliographical search identified 10,074 articles, which were filtered subsequently. Finally, the most pertinent nine articles were included and scrutinized for data synthesis and analysis. This includes five randomized controlled trials and four non-randomized controlled trials in different countries that focused on children (33.3%), adolescents (11.1%), and adults (55.6%). The interventions used virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) to promote knowledge and attitudes towards oral care, improve toothbrushing performance, and smoking cessation, and reduce anxiety levels in oral health education.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that immersive technologies, including VR and AR, significantly enhance oral health knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy, leading to improved health outcomes.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Immersive technologies such as VR and AR have the potential to provide innovative and effective methods for enhancing oral health promotion and education, while promoting positive health behaviours, which are crucial for improving overall oral health outcomes.
METHODS: Three databases were searched from January 2011 to June 2025. Eligible evidence comprised only systematic reviews (with/without meta-analysis) published in English which focused on undergraduate or postgraduate dental students using VR, haptic, or integrated VR-haptic simulation for skills training. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, appraised methodological quality using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2), and calculated the Corrected Covered Area (CCA) to assess citation overlap.
RESULTS: Six systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria; one included a meta-analysis reporting a significant performance advantage after haptic-simulator training, albeit with very high heterogeneity (I2 = 92%). Across reviews, VR-haptic training was consistently associated with improved preclinical performance (accuracy, error reduction, efficiency) and greater learner confidence, with the strongest evidence in restorative dentistry and supportive signals in endodontics, implantology, periodontics, paediatric dentistry, radiology and oral & maxillofacial surgery. Methodological confidence was limited: AMSTAR 2 ratings were low to critically low. Overlap analysis indicated moderate redundancy (CCA = 6.05%), suggesting some recirculation of primary trials across reviews.
CONCLUSIONS: VR and haptic simulators confer meaningful advantages for preclinical acquisition and learner confidence in dental education, but certainty is tempered by methodological weaknesses and substantial heterogeneity. Their optimal role is as high-fidelity adjuncts within blended curricula.