Patient noncompliance: Are children consistent?

Adolescents' experiences of using removable functional appliances

“…The parents' support was presented as a positive experience including nagging. This is in agreement with previous research (9,12,28) especially the study by Gross et al (1985) (28) who tested a reward programme for compliance, which seems to have a positive effect on parentchild relationships. Furthermore, additional outcome reveals the importance of both adolescents and parents participating in the treatment, making clear that the family, and not only the adolescent, is going to be responsible for its success.…”

“…Patient cooperation is the single most important factor every orthodontist must put up with (6)(7)(8). Failure to hold on to prescribe schedules of removable appliance wear will result in either slow treatment response or no response at all (9). Appliance wear is determined by treatmentrelated factors such as routine and perceived comfort, as well as by external factors such as patient and parental attitudes.…”

“…Patient attitudes are the critical link between these influences (10). Several studies have been performed to investigate and explain the main reasons for poor compliance (7,9,11). The interview study by Trulsson et al (12) illustrates the importance of more parental involvement for younger children's compliance than older children, who seem to have a higher degree of internal motivation for treatment and less need for parental support.…”

Medical regimen adherence: Concepts, assessment, and interventions.

“…In type 1 diabetes, for example, there are at least six different components of the treatment regimen (insulin administration, exercise, types of foods consumed, amount of calories consumed, frequency of food consumption and glucose testing, and concentrated sweet consumption) that are all unrelated to each other (see Johnson, 1992, for a review). Variance in adherence across different components of a complex treatment regimen has been documented for many diseases and conditions including hypertension (Kravitz et al, 1993), cystic fibrosis (Passero, Remor, & Salomon, 1981), epilepsy (Hazsard, Hutchinson, & Krawiecki, 1990), diabetes (Orme & Binik, 1989), and orthodontics (Gross, Samson, Sanders, &. Smith, 1988), suggesting that single indicator assessments of adherence will prove inadequate in many, if not most, situations.…”