Randomized controlled trial of a patient decision-making aid for orthodontics

Parker, Kate; Cunningham, Susan; Petrie, Aviva; Ryan, Fiona

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.04.011

Cited by 22 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In another study, which evaluated a new decision‐making tool, named Fixed Appliance Decision Aid (FADA), not only patients were recruited but their parents as well . Findings were more promising than those reported by Parker et al, as decisional conflict reduced in both patients and parents with an increased knowledge about duration and frequency of orthodontic treatment.…”

Section: Sdm In Different Dental Specialties: Patient Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In order to facilitate the implementation of SDM and patient‐centered care in the dental field, various decision‐making aids and support systems adapted to different dental specialties have been developed in the past few years, namely patient decision‐making aids (PDAs), which are specific tools and support systems designed to help patients reach personal decisions regarding their health care choices …”

Section: Sdm In Different Dental Specialties: Patient Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Orthodontics, another field of dentistry in which there are often multiple viable treatment options, there is an increased need for SDM and the use of PDAs. In this sense, Parker et al developed a PDA to help provide adolescent patients with information on fixed appliance orthodontic treatment, in an attempt to decrease decisional conflict. Despite the fact that the PDA group demonstrated a lower total Decisional Conflict score than the control group, this result was not statistically significant.…”

Section: Sdm In Different Dental Specialties: Patient Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,9,10 Despite the fact that SDM is an established concept in clinical medicine, there is a very limited number of publications that have investigated SDM in dentistry. 4,[11][12][13][14][15][16] The reasons for that remain unclear. 17 However, dental patients are certainly autonomous to make their own treatment choices due to the new acts and laws that have been legislated with time, thus cementing their role as "consumers" of dental care.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Shared decision‐making (SDM) in dentistry: A concise narrative review

Asa’ad

2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this review was to evaluate the implementation of shared decision‐making (SDM) in dentistry and the roles of informed consent and patient decision‐making aids (PDAs) as part of this process. Materials and Methods A review of pertinent literature was performed using PubMed and MEDLINE to determine the current position of the application of SDM in dentistry and the influence of informed consent and PDAs on this process. Results Limited number of published studies on the implementation of SDM in dental practice is available. These studies demonstrated that SDM is influenced by many factors. Informed consent intertwines with the SDM process and begins with providing high quality information to patients and employing PDAs. PDAs have been developed for some dental fields to facilitate the SDM process. Conclusions SDM is applied in dentistry and is influenced by many factors. Informed consent is an important part of this process. PDAs in more dental fields need to be further developed, in order to ensure a satisfactory integration of patients in the SDM process.

show abstract

Section: Sdm In Different Dental Specialties: Patient Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Sdm In Different Dental Specialties: Patient Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sdm In Different Dental Specialties: Patient Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Shared decision‐making (SDM) in dentistry: A concise narrative review

Asa’ad

2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When communicating risk, clinicians must now understand their patients' individual values, beliefs in relation to the risks of treatment and their risk information needs. However, the development of orthodontic risk communication tools, such as information leaflets [16][17][18], audio-visual information packages [19], decision aids [20,21] and messaging apps [22,23], have rarely been guided by the views of adolescent patients who may have different perceptions of risk information to professionals [24] and primary carers [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adolescent perceptions of orthodontic treatment risks and risk information: A qualitative study

Perry

Johnson

Popat

et al. 2018

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: For effective risk communication, clinicians must understand patients' values and beliefs in relation to the risks of treatment. This qualitative study aimed to explore adolescent perceptions of orthodontic treatment risks and risk information. Methods: Five focus groups were carried out with 32 school/college pupils aged 12-18 in Wales, UK. Participants were purposively selected and had all experienced orthodontic treatment. A thematic approach was used for analysis and data collection was completed at the point of data saturation. Results: Four themes emerged from the data; (a) day-to-day risks of orthodontic treatment, (b) important orthodontic risk information, (c) engaging with orthodontic risk information and (d) managing the risks of orthodontic treatment. Day-to-day risks of orthodontic treatment that were affecting participants "here and now" were of most concern. Information about preventing the risks of treatment was deemed to be important. Participants did not actively seek risk information but engaged passively with information from convenient sources. Perceptions of risk susceptibility influenced participants' management of the risks of orthodontic treatment. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that adolescent patients can understand information about the nature and severity of orthodontic treatment risks. However, adolescent patients can have false perceptions if the risks are unfamiliar, perceived only to have a future impact or if seen as easy to control. Adolescent patients must be provided with timely and easily accessible risk information and with practical solutions to prevent the risks of treatment. Clinical significance: The views and experiences gathered in this study can assist clinicians to better understand their young patients' beliefs about treatment risks, facilitate effective risk communication and contribute to improved patient-centred care.

show abstract