Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop ; 163(6): 843-850, 2023 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36732092

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the quality of online information on orthodontic treatment provided by orthodontic Web sites in the United States and investigate their claims. METHODS: Three hundred and one American orthodontic Web sites were identified after an advanced Google search. Data collection included: the location of the clinic, treatment options offered, quality-of-information assessment using the DISCERN tool, and finally, claims when promoting 1 treatment option against another, as well as the presence of information on relapse risk and retention needs. RESULTS: All Web sites belonged to private clinics, with more than half (60.5%) in a single location. Invisalign (Align Technology, Santa Clara, Calif) was the most commonly promoted treatment option (94%), followed by the full fixed appliance (FFA) (92%). The mean DISCERN total score was poor (36.78 out of 80.00), whereas the mean reliability (questions 1-8) and quality-of-information (questions 9-15) scores were 17.06 out of 40.00 and 16.85 out of 35.00, respectively. Almost one-third (28%) of the Web sites compared aligners to FFA, whereas 25% claimed that aligners are less painful than FFA, faster than FFA (14%), or give better results than FFA (1%). Almost half of the Web sites (47%) failed to display information on relapse risk and retention needs after orthodontic treatment (41%). The Web sites that displayed such info had higher DISCERN total scores (P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Invisalign seems to be the treatment modality most commonly mentioned online. According to DISCERN, U.S. orthodontic Web sites display poor or fair quality information. On many Web sites, aligner treatment was compared with FFA, with some stating that aligners cause less pain than FFA or are more efficient/faster than FFA. Moreover, almost half of the American orthodontic Web sites failed to display information on the relapse risk or retention need. Display of such information can be an indicator of better-quality Web sites. There is ample room for improvement in the online information American orthodontists provide to potential patients.


Assuntos
Aparelhos Ortodônticos Removíveis , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Aparelhos Ortodônticos Fixos , Dor , Recidiva
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...