Patients and their parents share similar expectations of orthodontic treatment for most aspects of care, although parents are more realistic in their estimation of the duration of treatment and the initial visit. The expectations of patients differ from those of their parents with regard to dietary and drink restrictions in relation to orthodontic treatment. Ethnicity significantly influences expectations of orthodontic treatment, and this may relate to differences in the patients' and their parents' assessed outcome of care.

This study provides a valid and reliable measure of orthodontic expectations in participants aged 12-14 years and their parents.

Differences in expectations of orthodontic treatment were more common between Black British and White British primary carers, than their children. White British primary carers had higher expectations at their child's initial appointment and expected dental extractions to be part of the orthodontic treatment plan. These differences have some implications for the provision of orthodontic care. A clinicians understanding of patients and their primary carer's expectations at the start of treatment can help in the quality and delivery of orthodontic care provided.

Information leaflets did not have an immediate impact on patients' expectations of orthodontic treatment. The cost implication of providing information leaflets to patients must be weighed against the limited benefit they provide.

Objectives: To qualitatively explore, and analyse, patients’ expectations before the start of fixed appliance orthodontic treatment and determine whether typologies exist. Design: A prospective cross-sectional qualitative study, which involved 13 patients (aged 12–15 years). Setting: NHS Hospital Orthodontic Department (UK). Materials and methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with patients who consented to participate before the start of fixed appliance orthodontic treatment. The in-depth interview data were transcribed and then managed using a framework approach, followed by associative analysis. Results: The in-depth interviews revealed two major themes and associated subthemes which were: first, patients’ expectations about the treatment process and outcome; and second, patients’ expectations of themselves during and after treatment. Three typologies related to patients’ expectations of the orthodontic treatment process were also identified. The first group of participants had minimal expectations of the treatment process, did not anticipate discomfort or pain and did not anticipate that treatment would cause disruption to their daily life. The second group of participants had expectations that treatment would involve arch wire changes, dental extractions and result in some discomfort/pain, which would cause some limited disruption to their daily life (moderate expectations). The third type of participant had expectations of the treatment process involving arch wire changes and dental extractions, and anticipated that the discomfort and pain experienced would significantly affect their daily life (marked expectations). Conclusions: These results provide the clinician with information about patient typologies and provide the clinician with some direction when communicating with their patients and managing their expectations before the start of treatment.

This study shows that patients requesting lingual orthodontics have expectations that are similar in quality but greater in extent when compared to those seeking labial orthodontics.

No abstract

Objective: To determine the psychometric properties of a pre-existing orthodontic satisfaction questionnaire and to assess patient satisfaction of their orthodontic treatment. Design: Psychometric assessment of a pre-existing orthodontic satisfaction questionnaire. Setting: Two sites at King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Participants: Individuals aged 12–15 years who had completed fixed orthodontic treatment. Methods: An expert panel assessed a pre-existing orthodontic treatment satisfaction questionnaire for validity and readability. As a result, revisions were made to the questionnaire and it was distributed to 103 participants aged 12–15 years, on completion of their fixed orthodontic treatment (T1). Test–retest reliability of the questionnaire was assessed through completion of a second questionnaire by 17 participants, at a two-week interval (T2). The questionnaire was assessed for reliability using item-total correlations (I-TC) and Cronbach’s alpha. Factor analysis allowed exploration of the underlying factor structure of the questionnaire. Test–retest reliability was assessed using Cohen’s kappa coefficient. Multiple regression analysis was used to find out the significant demographic variables that predicts the satisfaction level of treatment. Results: Following validity and readability assessment by the expert panel, the questionnaire was revised. Eleven items were removed following item analysis (with I-TC ⩽ 0.3). Factor analysis was deemed uninterpretable. The overall scale demonstrated greater reliability than the underlying sub-scales. Therefore, the sub-scales were removed, resulting in one scale which assessed overall orthodontic satisfaction, comprising 37 items, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.92. The test–retest reliability of the revised 37-item scale was deemed to be poor (kappa coefficient = 0.39). Multiple regression analysis identified ethnicity as a significant predictor of orthodontic treatment satisfaction ( P = 0.01). Conclusion: This study provides a valid measure to assess orthodontic treatment satisfaction for use in a UK population aged 12–15 years on completion of fixed orthodontic treatment.