Objective: The objective of this study was to measure and assess the implant education received by graduates from the University of Iowa College of Dentistry and Dental Clinics. This study measured the self-reported competency levels of dental practitioners with regards to providing and maintaining dental implants as treatment modalities to their patients. The study assessed dental graduates’ willingness to practice and perform dental implant procedures, including both surgical and prosthetic treatments. Additionally, the study identifies challenges that face practicing dentists treating patients with dental implants and identifies the preferred way practitioners seek future training after completing dental school. Methods: A 36-item electronic survey was created and distributed to 737 dentists who graduated from the University of Iowa College of Dentistry and Dental Clinics. Dentists’ demographics, practice characteristics, and detailed self-reported competency in implant dentistry were collected. Statistical analysis of the responses consisted of descriptive statistics and bivariate analysis, and nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Spearman’s rank correlation test along with a chi-square test were used for detecting the differences, correlations and associations under different conditions. Results: 154 dentists completed the survey (21% response rate), while only 143 subjects who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were included for the statistical analysis. The survey consisted mostly of males (56.6%). The mean age of respondents was 34.2 years old with a mean practice time of 6.2 years. Of the responding dentists, 21.7% completed a postgraduate training program and 51% of the respondents were in group practice. 66% of the respondents practice in the Midwest region of the US and 71.3% of the respondents took continuing educational courses in implant dentistry and the mean cumulative hours of CE courses in implant dentistry was 33.8 hours. The mean average of implant restorations provided per year was 11.7 and the mean average of implant placements per year was 19.6. There was a significant correlation between cumulative hours of Continuing Education courses and number of implant units on average placed or restored. 64.3% of the dentists are not satisfied with the implant education given at the dental student level. 95.8% of the dentists reported that dental school training is not adequate to surgically place dental implants in their practice. Only 32.4% reported that dental school training was not adequate to restore dental implants in their practice. The preferred way to receive additional training about dental implants is short-term CE courses and workshop courses conducted by implant companies. 23.6% of the dentists reported they are competent at surgically placing dental implants in their practice. 79.1% reported they are competent at restoring dental implants in the dental office. Only 28.4% reported that they feel dental implants are more difficult than other dental treatments. Conclusions: Graduate dentists from the University of Iowa are not expected to be competent in all components of implant dentistry without further postgraduate training. Respondents stated that their dental school training in surgical placement of implants was inadequate. To build upon their dental school training, the two main preferred education pathways as reported by respondents were short-term continuing education courses and workshops courses conducted by implant companies. Within the parameters of this study, we can conclude the following: 1.Age, GPA, number of CE hours in dental implant therapy, specialty status, and time since graduation did not influence undergraduate education satisfaction in dental implant therapy. 2.There is a positive correlation between the number of CE course hours and the number of implant units restored or placed by general dentists. 3.Male dentists, those who practice in group practice settings, and those who have graduated six or more years ago reported a greater number of CE course hours in dental implant therapy. 4.Those who graduated with GPAs less than or equal to 3.4, general dentists, and those who enrolled in a high number of CE courses were more confident in restoring dental implants. 5.Those who graduated with a GPA greater than or equal to 3.5, specialist dentists, and those who enrolled in a high number of CE courses were more confident in surgically placing dental implants. 6.Males, general dentists, those who practice in a group practice setting, and those who graduated six years or more ago restored more implants on average per year. 7.Males, specialist dentists, those who practice outside the Midwest US, and those who graduated six years or more ago surgically place more implants on average per year.