A cross-sectional analysis of the reliability, content and readability of orthodontic retention and retainer informed consent forms

IF 1.8 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

International Orthodontics Pub Date : 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ortho.2025.101002

Maurice J. Meade , Sven Jensen , Xiangqun Ju , David Hunter , Lisa Jamieson

{"title":"A cross-sectional analysis of the reliability, content and readability of orthodontic retention and retainer informed consent forms","authors":"Maurice J. Meade , Sven Jensen , Xiangqun Ju , David Hunter , Lisa Jamieson","doi":"10.1016/j.ortho.2025.101002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The aim of the study was to determine the reliability, quality and readability of content contained within informed consent forms concerning orthodontic retention and retainers provided by orthodontic treatment providers.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>An online search strategy identified informed consent forms for evaluation. The DISCERN instrument was used to determine content reliability. Each form was assessed for the presence of pre-determined content regarding 11 domains. Analysis for quality of the domain content was via a 4-point scoring scale. The Simple Measure of Gobbledegook (SMOG) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL) were employed to determine readability.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Thirty-four forms satisfied selection criteria. The majority (<em>n</em>  =22; 64.7%) from specialist orthodontist websites. The mean (SD) DISCERN score per form was 31.9 (4.5). The mean (SD) number of domains present within each form was 7.76 (1.65). The mean (SD) number of points scored per form was 14.82 (3.01) from a maximum of 33. Information regarding retainer review and relevant potential impacts on quality-of-life was lacking and scored poorly. The requirement for lifetime retention was stated in 25 (73.5%) forms. Forms sourced from specialist orthodontist websites scored higher (<em>P</em>  <!-->0.016) than those sourced from general dentist and multi-disciplinary clinic websites. The median (IQR) SMOG and FKGL scores were 10.11 (9.55) and 9.95 (9.18) respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The reliability and quality of the informed consent forms concerning orthodontic retention and retainers was generally poor. The readability of the forms failed to meet recommended guidelines, meaning that many are likely not to comprehend the information provided.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":45449,"journal":{"name":"International Orthodontics","volume":"23 3","pages":"Article 101002"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1761722725000373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the study was to determine the reliability, quality and readability of content contained within informed consent forms concerning orthodontic retention and retainers provided by orthodontic treatment providers.

Methods

An online search strategy identified informed consent forms for evaluation. The DISCERN instrument was used to determine content reliability. Each form was assessed for the presence of pre-determined content regarding 11 domains. Analysis for quality of the domain content was via a 4-point scoring scale. The Simple Measure of Gobbledegook (SMOG) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL) were employed to determine readability.

Results

Thirty-four forms satisfied selection criteria. The majority (n = 20; 58.8%) were sourced from websites in the US, with most (n = 22; 64.7%) from specialist orthodontist websites. The mean (SD) DISCERN score per form was 31.9 (4.5). The mean (SD) number of domains present within each form was 7.76 (1.65). The mean (SD) number of points scored per form was 14.82 (3.01) from a maximum of 33. Information regarding retainer review and relevant potential impacts on quality-of-life was lacking and scored poorly. The requirement for lifetime retention was stated in 25 (73.5%) forms. Forms sourced from specialist orthodontist websites scored higher (P = 0.016) than those sourced from general dentist and multi-disciplinary clinic websites. The median (IQR) SMOG and FKGL scores were 10.11 (9.55) and 9.95 (9.18) respectively.

Conclusions

The reliability and quality of the informed consent forms concerning orthodontic retention and retainers was generally poor. The readability of the forms failed to meet recommended guidelines, meaning that many are likely not to comprehend the information provided.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Orthodontics DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-

CiteScore

2.50

自引率

13.30%

发文量

审稿时长

26 days

期刊介绍： Une revue de référence dans le domaine de orthodontie et des disciplines frontières Your reference in dentofacial orthopedics International Orthodontics adresse aux orthodontistes, aux dentistes, aux stomatologistes, aux chirurgiens maxillo-faciaux et aux plasticiens de la face, ainsi quà leurs assistant(e)s. International Orthodontics is addressed to orthodontists, dentists, stomatologists, maxillofacial surgeons and facial plastic surgeons, as well as their assistants.