Background: Clear post-extraction sessions are vital for good patient outcomes. Traditional methods, such as verbal and printed information, have historically been prevalent; however, digital health care methods for analysis and communication are increasingly being adopted. Still, evidence comparing preferences for digital versus traditional instruction, especially for routine post-extraction care, remains limited. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate preferences between digital methods (QR code-based videos) and traditional methods (verbal and printed leaflets) for delivering post-extraction care instructions among dental patients and students. It also assesses perceptions of communication quality, confidence, and patient interaction associated with each method. Methods: A cross-sectional study involved 200 dental students and 200 patients undergoing routine tooth extractions. The sample size was determined based on a 5% margin of error at a 95% confidence level for proportion estimation. Participants experienced all three instructional delivery methods—verbal, printed leaflet, and QR code-based video—for post-extraction care and completed validated questionnaires. The study assessed preferences for each delivery method, communication quality, confidence in following or providing instructions, ease of access, perceived usefulness, and impact on patient-provider interaction. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the Mann–Whitney U test for group comparisons, and Spearman correlation for relationships among ordinal data. Results: Among all participants, 67.5% chose QR codes as the preferred method for improving communication (p < 0.001). Among dental students, 49% favored QR codes as the best method for postoperative instructions, and 50.5% indicated that QR codes boosted their confidence in providing instructions to patients. Preference for QR codes ranged from 43.5% to 65.5% across different aspects evaluated. Notably, among patients aged 60 years or older, 65.5% considered QR codes the most convenient for the elderly. Mann–Whitney U tests showed statistically significant differences between students and patients for ease of access (p = 0.009, rank biserial r = −0.143), video length appropriateness (p = 0.003, rank biserial r = −0.160), and the unlikelihood of missing instructions (p < 0.001, rank biserial r = −0.446). Conclusions: QR code-based video instructions were widely preferred over traditional methods by both dental students and patients for post-extraction care delivery. These findings support the integration of digital communication tools into post-extraction care protocols as a complement to traditional instruction delivery methods, though longitudinal studies assessing actual clinical outcomes are needed.

Unicystic ameloblastoma is a cystic variant of ameloblastoma that may clinically and radiographically mimic odontogenic cysts and, in some cases, conventional ameloblastoma. The mural subtype is characterized by ameloblastomatous epithelial infiltration of the fibrous cyst wall and may demonstrate more aggressive biological behavior than other unicystic variants. This report describes a mural unicystic ameloblastoma in a 62‐year‐old male presenting with a long‐standing painless swelling of the left mandible. Cone‐beam computed tomography demonstrated a well‐defined radiolucent lesion measuring approximately 47 × 25 mm with marked buccolingual expansion, internal septations producing a multiloculated appearance, and focal buccal cortical perforation. Incisional biopsy established the diagnosis of ameloblastoma without definitive subclassification. Segmental mandibular resection was subsequently performed because of the lesion′s radiographic extent and cortical perforation. Histopathological examination of the resected specimen demonstrated a true cystic lesion lined by ameloblastomatous odontogenic epithelium with extensive intraluminal plexiform epithelial proliferation and multiple ameloblastomatous epithelial islands infiltrating the fibrous cyst wall, confirming mural unicystic ameloblastoma. Despite these findings, preservation of the underlying cystic architecture supported the diagnosis of mural unicystic ameloblastoma rather than predominantly solid ameloblastoma with secondary cystic degeneration. This case highlights the diagnostic challenges of unicystic ameloblastoma in lesions demonstrating multiloculated radiographic appearance, cortical perforation, and extensive intraluminal and mural proliferation, and emphasizes the importance of adequate histopathological sampling and clinicopathological correlation for accurate subclassification and surgical management.