Group 1 (control group) will receive only theoretical training.

Group 2 (test group) will receive training with typodont-fantom head in addition to theoretical training.

Use of typodont phantom head model in addition to theoretical periodontal education

After completing training, students in both groups took a state anxiety test using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) before performing supragingival instrumentation. The STAI, which assesses current anxiety levels with 20 items, provides a total score from 20 to 80 points.The STAI was completed using a 4-point Likert scale for each question. Items 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17, and 18 contribute positive scores, which increased the total anxiety score. Conversely, items 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, and 20 contributed negative scores, which decreased the total anxiety score. Each item was scored between 1 (or -1) and 4 (or -4) based on its positive or negative nature, and a constant of 50 is added to the total score. Higher scores indicated higher levels of state anxiety.

The clinical performance of the participants was evaluated by a blind periodontologist using a scaling operation score sheet.The scale assessed clinical performance across four categories: preoperative preparation, intraoperative operation, periodontal probing, and supragingival instrumentation. Each category included specific criteria with assigned points, resulting in a maximum score of 100. The evaluation focused on fundamental aspects including equipment preparation, positioning, probing techniques, and supragingival scaling.

The evaluation of students' satisfaction with their training following the intervention was conducted using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS was presented as a horizontal line, 10 centimeters in length, with endpoints labeled to represent the extremes of satisfaction. One end of the line was labeled 0 to represent very low satisfaction, and the other end was labeled 10 to represent very high satisfaction. Participants marked a point on the line that best reflected their level of satisfaction. The distance from the 0 end to the participant's mark was measured in millimeters, providing a quantitative score of their satisfaction level.