Evaluation of treatment risks and the quality of information contained within the websites of specialist orthodontists

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the treatment risks and the quality of information contained within the websites of specialist orthodontists in Australia. Methods The term ‘specialist orthodontic practice’ was entered into three internet search engines. Websites satisfying inclusion and exclusion criteria were evaluated for orthodontic treatment risk information against nine common treatment risks. For website reliability and quality, the DISCERN instrument was used along with the HON (health on the net) seal certification; and for readability, the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) Test was applied. Results Of the 105 websites that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4.8% reported all nine risks. No risks were reported by 17.1%. Relapse (64.8%) was the most common risk recorded on websites, followed by ‘pain/discomfort’ (63.8%). Root resorption was reported by 5.7%. The requirement for life-long retention was indicated by 22.9% of the websites and 57.1% gave advice on sports mouthguard wear. The proposed benefits of orthodontic treatment were outlined by 85.7%. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) overall DISCERN score was 43.78 (SD 6.49; range 17–59). No website displayed the HON Seal certification. The mean FRE Score was 51.71 (SD 10.19; range 30.1–74.7). Conclusions Information regarding orthodontic treatment risks contained within specialist orthodontic practice websites appears deficient. Websites were of variable reliability, quality and readability. Further development of specialist orthodontists’ websites is required to ensure the delivery of accessible, reliable and understandable evidence-based information to patients.

Alveolar osteitis: A qualitative and readability assessment of patient information on the Internet

“…The public is increasingly accessing online resources in searches for health information. 36 Of concern and in addition, the content uploaded onto websites is largely unregulated which further underlines the importance of studies to assess the quality and readability of the information. 24 The findings of the present study indicated that the online information related to AO was highly variable as the readability scores were below the recommended levels for written health information.…”

“…2 Multi-stakeholder effort is required to ensure that clearly written, unbiased, reliable and evidenced-based information is provided. 24,36,43 To enable this, the healthcare professions could work collaboratively to ensure that authors of websites strive to include a 'seal of reliability' on their websites (such as the HONcode seal), and to ensure that the public are aware of its existence and its meaning. A remedial approach would be for professional dental societies to develop freely available online information websites that satisfy the criteria for high-quality information, and to which search engines and websites can provide a link.…”

“…A remedial approach would be for professional dental societies to develop freely available online information websites that satisfy the criteria for high-quality information, and to which search engines and websites can provide a link. 36 This would help enable the dental profession's delivery of trustworthy information within a largely unregulated online environment.…”

“…This appears to be the first study to assess the quality of information regarding AO on the Internet. The public is increasingly accessing online resources in searches for health information 36 . Of concern and in addition, the content uploaded onto websites is largely unregulated which further underlines the importance of studies to assess the quality and readability of the information 24 .…”

“…The aetiological, preventative and management factors related to AO can make it challenging to describe accurately in simple jargon‐free terms 2 . Multi‐stakeholder effort is required to ensure that clearly written, unbiased, reliable and evidenced‐based information is provided 24,36,43 . To enable this, the healthcare professions could work collaboratively to ensure that authors of websites strive to include a ‘seal of reliability’ on their websites (such as the HONcode seal), and to ensure that the public are aware of its existence and its meaning.…”