A cross-sectional analysis of the reliability, content and readability of orthodontic retention and retainer informed consent forms - 02/04/25
, Sven Jensen 1, Xiangqun Ju 2, David Hunter 3, Lisa Jamieson 2Highlights |
• | Orthodontic retention consent forms were assessed for quality and readability. |
• | Analysis with the DISCERN instrument indicated content of the forms was unreliable. |
• | Important content was lacking, and the information present was difficult to read. |
• | The provision for patient-tailored information was limited. |
• | Many are unlikely to fully understand the information provided. |
Summary |
Objective |
The aim of the study was to determine the reliability, quality and readability of content contained within informed consent forms concerning orthodontic retention and retainers provided by orthodontic treatment providers.
Methods |
An online search strategy identified informed consent forms for evaluation. The DISCERN instrument was used to determine content reliability. Each form was assessed for the presence of pre-determined content regarding 11 domains. Analysis for quality of the domain content was via a 4-point scoring scale. The Simple Measure of Gobbledegook (SMOG) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL) were employed to determine readability.
Results |
Thirty-four forms satisfied selection criteria. The majority (n=20; 58.8%) were sourced from websites in the US, with most (n=22; 64.7%) from specialist orthodontist websites. The mean (SD) DISCERN score per form was 31.9 (4.5). The mean (SD) number of domains present within each form was 7.76 (1.65). The mean (SD) number of points scored per form was 14.82 (3.01) from a maximum of 33. Information regarding retainer review and relevant potential impacts on quality-of-life was lacking and scored poorly. The requirement for lifetime retention was stated in 25 (73.5%) forms. Forms sourced from specialist orthodontist websites scored higher (P=0.016) than those sourced from general dentist and multi-disciplinary clinic websites. The median (IQR) SMOG and FKGL scores were 10.11 (9.55) and 9.95 (9.18) respectively.
Conclusions |
The reliability and quality of the informed consent forms concerning orthodontic retention and retainers was generally poor. The readability of the forms failed to meet recommended guidelines, meaning that many are likely not to comprehend the information provided.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Dentistry, Ethics, Informed consent, Orthodontic retention, Orthodontics, Retainers, Valid consent
Plan
Vol 23 - N° 3
Article 101002- septembre 2025 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Comparison of the friction resistance of 3D-printed polyurethane orthodontic brackets with and without zirconium oxide nanoparticles with conventional metal and ceramic brackets: An in vitro study
- Srinidhi Ramasundaram, Dilip Srinivasan, Ravi Kannan, Devasahayam Davis
- Analysis of quality of orthodontic treatment and determining factors that affect the quality of finishing in orthodontic graduate clinic using peer assessment rating: A retrospective case-control study study
- Maria A. Ossa, Katherine Tran, Sasha Z. Daroga, Kaylee A. Gomez, Wei-En Lu, Ai Ni, Zongyang Sun, Henry W. Fields, Toru Deguchi
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?