Dental education has followed a similar model for decades. Students learn on typodonts, plastic teeth, and occasionally cadavers or extracted teeth. These tools have helped build foundational skills, but they don’t fully prepare students for what happens when they treat a real patient.
That moment shapes technical ability, confidence, decision-making, and ultimately patient outcomes. Many of the procedures students find most challenging such as extractions, suturing, implant placement, and surgical techniques rely on subtle tactile feedback and spatial awareness that traditional training models struggle to reproduce.
Simulation has become central to how schools try to bridge that gap. But without realism, its impact is limited.
This limitation in dental education has been overcome with the introduction of educational models based on biomimetic principles of dentistry. These biomimetic models move beyond static representations to replicate the biological behavior of oral structures.
“You can teach technique and walk through a procedure, but if the model doesn’t behave like the human body, the student is still learning something abstract,” Kreyer explains. “They understand the steps, but they don’t fully understand the experience.”
That is beginning to change with the introduction of 3D printed dental anatomical models. Built from real patient data such as CBCT scans, these models bring anatomical complexity into a controlled training environment. More importantly, advances in multi-material, PolyJet 3D printing with voxel technology allow the models to behave in ways that more closely resemble soft tissue, teeth and bone within the oral environment.
“We can now simulate different bone densities, soft tissue, even the movement of a tooth within the periodontum,” Kreyer says. “That’s something students have never really had access to before in a repeatable way.”
This shift from visual approximation to physical interaction is significant. When students can feel resistance, understand how anatomy varies, and experience procedural steps more realistically, learning becomes more intuitive.
“It’s not just about seeing anatomy,” he adds. “It’s about interacting with it in a way that feels real.”
One of the most immediate impacts is confidence. Kreyer often hears from clinicians who describe their first real procedure as the most stressful moment of their training. Moving that first experience into a simulated environment changes the dynamic.
“If we can give students that experience earlier, in a place where they can repeat it and learn from mistakes, we’re setting them up very differently,” he says. “You’re not removing the learning curve. You’re accelerating acquisition of clinical skills in dental school by integrating biomimetic educational models into university curricula.”
There are also broader implications for how dental education is delivered. Traditional training environments can vary widely, with differences in materials, cases, and evaluation methods. With customizable dental models, educators can provide consistent scenarios across entire cohorts, creating a more standardized approach to teaching and assessment.
“With traditional training methods like cadaver models, every student’s experience is slightly different,” Kreyer explains. “What we’re starting to see now is the ability to create the same case, the same challenge, for every student. That opens the door to more objective evaluation and better tracking of progress.”
At the same time, these models address long-standing practical challenges. Cadavers are limited and expensive. Animal models introduce ethical and logistical concerns. Synthetic models provide a scalable alternative that is clean, repeatable, and accessible.
“From an education standpoint, having something that is consistent, reproducible, and available at scale makes a huge difference,” he says. “It allows schools to expand access to hands-on training in a way that wasn’t possible before.”
The shift also aligns with broader changes in dentistry itself. Digital workflows, from intraoral scanning to CAD design and additive manufacturing, are becoming standard in clinical practice. Education is beginning to reflect that reality.
“We’re seeing a convergence between digital and physical,” Kreyer notes. “Tools like GrabCAD allow you to assemble design files for models with very specific characteristics and then bring them into a physical environment for hands-on training. That connection is powerful.”
Looking ahead, Kreyer expects simulation to become more integrated, more data-driven, and more personalized. Physical models will increasingly work alongside digital tools, and patient-specific training will become more common.
