A quality assessment of orthodontic patient information leaflets.

Seehra, Jadbinder; Cockerham, Laura; Pandis, Nikolaos (2016). A quality assessment of orthodontic patient information leaflets. Progress in orthodontics, 17(15), p. 15. Springer 10.1186/s40510-016-0128-y

Preview

Text A quality assessment of orthodontic patient information leaflets.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (415kB) | Preview

BACKGROUND

Patient information leaflets (PILs) are often used to reinforce and provide further information relating to treatment choices, risks, and alternatives. An assessment of the quality of commonly used orthodontic patient information leaflets is lacking.

METHODS

A cross-sectional assessment of patient information leaflets from two international orthodontic societies was undertaken. The quality of each leaflet was assessed using the DISCERN instrument. The readability of each leaflet was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease instrument, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) index. Descriptive statistics followed by univariate analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patient information leaflets were identified. Reporting of DISCERN instrument items relating to aims, description of sources, details of additional sources, consequences of no treatment, possible treatment options, and support for a shared decision process was of low quality. The overall quality score for the total sample was 44. The median Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and SMOG index scores were 70 (interquartile range (IQR) 53.3-73.9), 7.2 (IQR 6-9.7), and 7.3 (IQR 6.7-9.1), respectively. There was a significant difference between the quality (-8.00, 95% CI: -14.62, -1.38, p < 0.001), Flesch Reading Ease (-22.30, 95% CI: -26.77, 17.83, p < 0.001) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (3.80, 95% CI: 2.74, 4.86, p < 0.001) scores between the two societies' PILs.

CONCLUSIONS

In relation to the DISCERN instrument, the quality of orthodontic PILs is deemed of moderate quality. There is a significant difference between the quality scores and the readability of PILs from different societies.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

413 since deposited on 26 Apr 2017
188 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item