Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Users Online: 89


Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 81-87

Informed consent in orthodontics: A Prospective RCT comparing two methods of information delivery

Department of Orthodontics, 5th Floor, Dental Institute, Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London, United Kingdom

Correspondence Address:
Pratik Kumar Sharma
Department of Orthodontics, 5th floor, Dental Institute, Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London
United Kingdom
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0974-7761.136052

Rights and Permissions

Objective: To assess the influence of two different methods of information delivery on recall of information during the consent process for orthodontic treatment. Design and setting: A prospective randomized controlled questionnaire based study conducted at the Royal London Hospital and Central Middlesex Hospital. Materials and Methods: 64 patients starting fixed appliance treatment aged between 10 and 15 years were recruited. The control group (n = 31) and their parents received verbal information only regarding fixed appliance treatment. The study group (n = 33) and their parents received verbal supplemented with written information concerning fixed appliance therapy. Supervised completion of questionnaires was conducted with subjects and their parents immediately after the consenting process and approximately 6 weeks later. Results: 61 patients and their parents completed the questionnaire (control group n = 30; study group n = 31). The study group was more aware about the possibility of pain from braces, the need for emergency visits or the possibility of breakages compared with the control group (OR 0.92, CI 0.11-0.79). The study group was three times more likely to know the correct answer to how long treatment would take to complete compared to the control group (OR 3.20, CI 1.11-9.22). Furthermore, the study group was 3.5 times more likely to give the correct answer to why it is necessary to wear retainers compared to the control group (OR 3.65, CI 1.16-11.44). Conclusions: Verbal information given to patients about fixed appliance treatment should be supplemented with additional written information.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded261    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal