VFRs were the most common retainer choice in the maxilla and mandible with full-time wear followed by part-time wear of RRs favoured by most. Full occlusal coverage with a thickness of 1.0 mm was the VFR design prescribed by the majority. More than one in six specialist orthodontists were aware that their patients used their VFRs as a receptacle for dental bleaching gel.

Background: The use of direct-to-consumer (DTC) orthodontic aligners is growing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of information contained within the websites of DTC orthodontic aligner providers. Methods: Websites that satisfied inclusion criteria were assessed for the presence of specific treatment-related features. Four validated quality of information instruments and readability tools were used to evaluate the content of the websites. Descriptive statistical analyses and intra-examiner reliability tests were performed. Results: Twenty-one websites were evaluated. Few websites referred to the need for pre-treatment dental health (38.1%) and indefinite post-treatment retention (23.8%). Most websites (95.2%) were categorized as either 'poor' or 'very poor' according to their DISCERN scores. DISCERN items regarding information bias and treatment risks scored particularly poorly. Cohen's kappa intra-examiner reliability testing for DISCERN scores was 0.81-0.89. Three websites honoured two out of the four Journal of the American Medical Association benchmarks and 18 honoured one benchmark only. The readability scores indicated 'difficult to read' content. Conclusions: The quality of information contained within the websites of DTC orthodontic aligner providers is poor. Patient consent for DTC aligner treatment based solely on the information contained within the websites is likely to be invalid.

Background Data regarding the quality of information (QOI) related to orthodontic clear aligners (OCAs) on the internet are lacking. The aim of the present investigation was to assess the quality and readability of websites providing information regarding OCAs to prospective patients. Methods Three search terms were entered separately into three search engines. Four validated QOI instruments were used to determine the QOI and readability of the content contained within the websites that satisfied predetermined criteria. Descriptive statistical analyses and intrarater testing for DISCERN scores were calculated. Results Forty‐nine websites satisfied inclusion/exclusion criteria. General dentists (44.9%) and specialist orthodontists (26.5%) authored the majority of websites. One website contained the Health on the Net (HON) code seal. Cohen’s kappa for DISCERN scores was good (0.87). The overall mean (SD) DISCERN score was 38.55 (8.00)/80, range 26–60. The websites authored by ‘Direct‐to‐consumer’ OCA providers recorded the lowest DISCERN mean score (33/80). One website contained all four Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks. The mean (SD) Flesch Reading Ease score was 53.92 (9.08), range 36–82.5. Conclusions The QOI of the website content related to OCAs is poor and is ‘fairly difficult’ to read. Website authors should consider using QOI instruments and readability tools to enable the delivery of evidence‐based and easily readable information regarding OCAs to prospective patients.

No abstract

No abstract