Cleft Lip and/or Palate Education and Undergraduate Preparedness in UK Dental School Curricula: A National Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) is a common congenital craniofacial anomaly, affecting approximately 1 in 700 births. Dental specialists form a core part of the cleft service, yet undergraduate dental education on CL/P across dental schools in the United Kingdom (UK) has not previously been described at a national level. AIMS: To evaluate the extent and format of CL/P teaching within UK undergraduate dental curricula, assess dental students' self-reported confidence and preparedness to manage CL/P patients and identify perceived educational gaps and barriers to clinical exposure. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to all 16 UK dental schools via the British Dental Association (BDA) Students' Committee between September 2024 and January 2025. Descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression were used to characterise teaching exposure and identify independent predictors of student confidence, clinical exposure, and career interest. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS: A total of 183 responses were received from all 16 dental schools (overall response rate 3.7%; 95% CI 3.2-4.2). Among the respondents, 63.4% reported nil or fewer than two hours of cumulative CL/P teaching. In addition, 65.0% (n = 119) lacked confidence in their CL/P knowledge, including 55.6% (n = 35) of BDS Year 5 respondents. Furthermore, 90.2% (n = 165) had never been clinically involved in CL/P patient care. Finally, 78.7% (n = 144) agreed that greater teaching is required. Teaching hours were the strongest independent predictor of confidence (OR 8.14, 95% CI 3.67-18.06, p < 0.001), cleft multidisciplinary team (MDT) awareness (OR 3.36, 95% CI 1.99-5.66, p < 0.001), and future specialist interest (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.09-3.04, p = 0.022). The proportion of respondents reporting nil or fewer than two hours of teaching ranged from 22% to 100% across institutions. No significant differences in teaching exposure or confidence were identified between dental schools co-located and not co-located with a designated primary surgical centre for cleft care. CONCLUSIONS: Undergraduate dental education in CL/P is inconsistent and frequently insufficient across UK dental schools. Teaching hours are the primary modifiable driver of student confidence and engagement. These findings support the development of a nationally standardised CL/P curriculum and scalable e-learning resource, aligned with CLAPA's End the Cleft Dental Crisis campaign.