ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the quality of information offered for patients seeking information on lingual orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: YouTube™ was searched for videos about lingual orthodontic treatment using the key word "lingual braces" from the Google Trends application. One hundred and four videos were selected to be analyzed from the first 120 results. The video content was evaluated using a 10-point score, which was used for classifying low- and high-content video groups. The video information and quality index (VIQI) was applied to determine the quality of the videos. The Mann-Whitney U-test, Chi-square test, and logistic regression analysis were used, and the Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for statistical evaluations. RESULTS: We classified 32 videos as high-content and 72 as low-content. Most videos were uploaded by laypeople (58.7%, n = 61). Definition of lingual braces and psychological impact were the most commonly discussed topics (51.0%), followed by speech performance (47.1%), pain (44.2%), tongue soreness (37.5%), and biomechanics (14.4%). Compared to the low-content group, the high-content video group had a significantly higher mean number of views (19,867.41 vs 6720.08, P = .002) and more "likes" (135.88 vs 13.01, P < .001), "dislikes" (4.34 vs 0.81, P < .001), and "comments" (26.28 vs 5.31, P = .002). There was no difference in the total VIQI score between the groups ( P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: The content of YouTube™ videos for lingual orthodontics was generally incomplete. Most videos mentioned psychological effects, but few videos discussed the biomechanics or procedure. Orthodontists should be aware of the information available on YouTube™.
Subject(s)
Orthodontic Brackets , Orthodontics, Corrective/education , Patient Education as Topic , Social Media , Video Recording , Esthetics, Dental , Humans , Orthodontics, Corrective/instrumentation , Orthodontics, Corrective/methods , Patient Education as Topic/standards , Social Media/standards , Video Recording/standardsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patients' and parents' perception of removable, fixed rigid, and fixed hybrid functional appliances and to compare their impacts on anxiety and discomfort during treatment in different age groups and genders. METHODS: Data were gathered by means of a questionnaire that included items presumed to be associated with orthodontic compliance. A self-administered questionnaire was used to quantify patients' and parents' perceptions. Three groups were formed regarding the type of functional appliance used: fixed rigid (Functional Mandibular Advancer, FMA), fixed hybrid (Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device, FRD), and removable (Twin Block, TB). Two separate questionnaires were used for the patients and their parents comprising the necessary context. Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Patients needed less time to adapt to the FRD appliance. Eating difficulties were encountered by patients in the FMA group. Adolescents who had completed functional orthodontic treatment with a removable appliance had difficulties in controlling their saliva. Patients' and parents' perceptions were found to be in accordance with each other. CONCLUSION: Adolescents who had completed functional orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances had more difficulty in their daily life. Orthodontists should be aware of this impact caused by functional orthodontic treatment and should regularly encourage patients by reminding them of the improvements to be had by fixing the malocclusion.
