A quality assessment of Internet information regarding accelerated orthodontics

Demirsoy, Kevser Kurt; Imamoglu, Tugce; Buyuk, Suleyman Kutalmış

doi:10.21307/aoj-2021.029

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the quality of information uploaded onto the Internet regarding accelerated orthodontics.

Materials and methods

The selected search terms ‘accelerated orthodontics’, ‘rapid orthodontics’, ‘speed orthodontics’, ‘rapid braces’, and ‘speed braces’ were searched by three commonly used search engines (Google, Yahoo, and Bing), and the URLs of the top 50 websites were recorded. The websites were evaluated using DISCERN, HONcode, and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark instruments. The readability of the websites was evaluated by the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL).

Results

The total mean DISCERN score (section 1 + section 2) for all websites was 29.50/75 (range: 15–68). The average FRES of all websites was 52.99 ± 31.91. Also, the average FKGL score of all websites was 10.73 ± 2.03. Professional health organisation websites had significantly higher DISCERN scores than other websites (p < 0.001). Only three websites had the HONcode seal. Professional organisation and private dental practice websites showed better compliance with JAMA benchmarks. There was no statistically significant difference related to FRES and FKGL scores between groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Information regarding accelerated orthodontics found on the Internet is insufficient. It is recommended that orthodontic societies and orthodontists increase the quality of the websites which describe accelerated orthodontics.

References

Jiang RP, McDonald JP, Fu MK. Root resorption before and after orthodontic treatment: a clinical study of contributory factors. Eur J Orthod 2010;32:693–7.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Richter AE, Arruda AO, Peters MC, Sohn W. Incidence of caries lesions among patients treated with comprehensive orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:657–64.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rekhi U, Catunda RQ, Gibson MP. Surgically accelerated orthodontic techniques and periodontal response: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod 2020;42:635–42.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sanivarapu S, Addanki PK, Palaparty R, Adurty C. Periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics: novel perio-ortho interrelationship. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2018;22:459–62.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gkantidis N, Mistakidis I, Kouskoura T, Pandis N. Effectiveness of non-conventional methods for accelerated orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2014;42:1300–19.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Miles P. Accelerated orthodontic treatment – what’s the evidence? Aust Dent J 2017;62(Suppl 1):63–70.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Olkun HK, Demirkaya AA, Aras B. The quality of Internet information on lingual orthodontics in the English language, with DISCERN and JAMA. J Orthod 2019;46:20–6.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Aldairy T, Laverick S, McIntyre GT. Orthognathic surgery: is patient information on the Internet valid? Eur J Orthod 2012;34:466–9.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Shuyler KS, Knight KM. What are patients seeking when they turn to the Internet? Qualitative content analysis of questions asked by visitors to an orthopaedics web site. J Med Internet Res 2003;5:e24.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
van der Marel S, Duijvestein M, Hardwick JC, van den Brink GR, Veenendaal R, Hommes DW, et al. Quality of web-based information on inflammatory bowel diseases. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:1891–6.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
de Boer MJ, Versteegen GJ, van Wijhe M. Patients’ use of the Internet for pain-related medical information. Patient Educ Couns 2007;68:86–97.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Patel U, Cobourne MT. Orthodontic extractions and the Internet: quality of online information available to the public. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:e103–9.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
McMorrow SM, Millett DT. Adult orthodontics: a quality assessment of Internet information. J Orthod 2016;43:186–92.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Livas C, Delli K, Ren Y. Quality evaluation of the available Internet information regarding pain during orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 2013;83:500–6.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Statcounter, 1999–2017. Statcounter: Search Engine Market Share Worldwide. Statcounter 1999–2017, available at: https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share, available at: https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share. Accessed 2 January 2021.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999;53:105–11.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Meade MJ, Dreyer CW. Web-based information on orthodontic clear aligners: a qualitative and readability assessment. Aust Dent J 2020;65:225–32.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor – Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA 1997;277:1244–5.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alderson JH, O’Neil DC, Redmond CE, Mulholland D, Lee MJ. Varicocele embolization: an assessment of the quality and readability of online patient information. Acad Radiol 2020;27:841–6.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol 1948;32:221–33.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Arun M, Usman Q, Johal A. Orthodontic treatment modalities: a qualitative assessment of Internet information. J Orthod 2017;44:82–9.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alfonso AR, DeMitchell-Rodriguez EM, Ramly EP, Noel DY, Levy-Lambert D, Wang MM. Assessment of American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association-Approved Teams’ websites for patient-oriented content and readability. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2019;56:1213–9.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Huang H, Williams RC, Kyrkanides S. Accelerated orthodontic tooth movement: molecular mechanisms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146:620–32.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Atkinson NL, Saperstein SL, Pleis J. Using the internet for health-related activities: findings from a national probability sample. J Med Internet Res 2009;11:e4.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pithon MM, dos Santos ES. Information available on the internet about pain after orthognathic surgery: a careful review. Dental Press J Orthod 2014;19:86–92.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Parekh J, Gill DS. The quality of orthodontic practice websites. Br Dent J 2014;216:E21.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Antonarakis GS, Kiliaridis S. Internet-derived information on cleft lip and palate for families with affected children. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2009;46:75–80.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Riordain RN, Hodgson T. Content and quality of website information on the treatment of oral ulcers. Br Dent J 2014;217:E15.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ni Riordain R, McCreary C. Head and neck cancer information on the internet: type, accuracy and content. Oral Oncol 2009;45:675–7.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ademiluyi G, Rees CE, Sheard CE. Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the Internet. Patient Educ Couns 2003;50:151–5.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article