Evaluation of orthodontic retention and retainer content on the Reddit social media website

IF 2.6 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Maurice J. Meade , Prashanthan Sooriakumaran , Xiangqun Ju , David Hunter , Lisa Jamieson
{"title":"Evaluation of orthodontic retention and retainer content on the Reddit social media website","authors":"Maurice J. Meade ,&nbsp;Prashanthan Sooriakumaran ,&nbsp;Xiangqun Ju ,&nbsp;David Hunter ,&nbsp;Lisa Jamieson","doi":"10.1016/j.ejwf.2023.06.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Social media can provide insight into patient experiences with health care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the content regarding orthodontic retention and retainers on the social media website, Reddit.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic search for relevant content submitted over a 12-month period on the Reddit forum, r/braces, was conducted. Qualitative analysis of the initial posts for themes and subthemes was conducted by two investigators. Responding comments to the initial posts were assessed for supportiveness for each initial poster and alignment with the evidence-base. Quantitative assessment was via descriptive statistics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 271 initial posts and 984 comments satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria. All initial posts were by patients. Just 1.12% (n = 11) of the comments appeared to be provided by oral health professionals. Most initial posts were negative (50.18%; n = 136), and most comments were positive (70.42%; n = 693). Alignment with the evidence-base was high among the comments (67.89%; n = 668). Eight main themes were identified with concerns regarding the negative impact of retention and retainers on quality of life, compliance with retention protocols and relapse commonly expressed. Concern regarding fear of relapse when waiting for the initial or renewal of retainers was a novel finding. More negative sentiments about orthodontists were expressed than positive.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Reddit is a supportive and reliable environment for patients regarding orthodontic retention and retainers. The content evaluation suggested deficiencies in communication processes between clinicians and patients. Greater engagement of the orthodontic profession in the provision of supportive and evidence-based information on an individual patient basis and through appropriate information channels is required.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":43456,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists","volume":"12 5","pages":"Pages 213-219"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212443823000565","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Social media can provide insight into patient experiences with health care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the content regarding orthodontic retention and retainers on the social media website, Reddit.

Methods

A systematic search for relevant content submitted over a 12-month period on the Reddit forum, r/braces, was conducted. Qualitative analysis of the initial posts for themes and subthemes was conducted by two investigators. Responding comments to the initial posts were assessed for supportiveness for each initial poster and alignment with the evidence-base. Quantitative assessment was via descriptive statistics.

Results

A total of 271 initial posts and 984 comments satisfied the inclusion/exclusion criteria. All initial posts were by patients. Just 1.12% (n = 11) of the comments appeared to be provided by oral health professionals. Most initial posts were negative (50.18%; n = 136), and most comments were positive (70.42%; n = 693). Alignment with the evidence-base was high among the comments (67.89%; n = 668). Eight main themes were identified with concerns regarding the negative impact of retention and retainers on quality of life, compliance with retention protocols and relapse commonly expressed. Concern regarding fear of relapse when waiting for the initial or renewal of retainers was a novel finding. More negative sentiments about orthodontists were expressed than positive.

Conclusions

Reddit is a supportive and reliable environment for patients regarding orthodontic retention and retainers. The content evaluation suggested deficiencies in communication processes between clinicians and patients. Greater engagement of the orthodontic profession in the provision of supportive and evidence-based information on an individual patient basis and through appropriate information channels is required.

Reddit社交媒体网站上的正畸固位和固位内容评估。
背景:社交媒体可以深入了解患者的医疗保健体验。本研究的目的是评估社交媒体网站Reddit上关于正畸固位和固位器的内容。方法:对Reddit论坛r/brackets上12个月内提交的相关内容进行系统搜索。两名调查人员对主题和次主题的最初员额进行了定性分析。评估了对最初帖子的回应意见对每个最初海报的支持程度以及与证据库的一致性。通过描述性统计进行定量评估。结果:共有271个初始帖子和984条评论符合纳入/排除标准。所有最初的帖子都是由患者发布的。只有1.12%(n=11)的评论似乎是由口腔健康专业人员提供的。大多数最初的帖子是负面的(50.18%;n=136),大多数评论是正面的(70.42%;n=693)。在评论中,与证据基础的一致性很高(67.89%;n=668)。确定了八个主要主题,主要关注保留和保留对生活质量、遵守保留方案和复发的负面影响。在等待首次或续聘时担心复发是一项新发现。对正畸医生表达的负面情绪多于正面情绪。结论:Reddit为患者提供了一个关于正畸固位和固位器的支持和可靠的环境。内容评估表明临床医生和患者之间的沟通过程存在缺陷。需要正畸专业人员更多地参与在个体患者基础上并通过适当的信息渠道提供支持性和循证信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists
Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信