Compliance of NHS dental practice websites in Wales before and after the introduction of the GDC document 'Principles of ethical advertising'

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the compliance of NHS dental practice websites in Wales, UK, with the 2012 GDC document Principles of ethical advertising, before its introduction (2011) and again after its introduction (2014).Methods All practices in Wales with an NHS contract and dental practice website were identified. The content of the website was evaluated to determine if it complied with the principles outlined in the 2012 GDC document Principles of Ethical Advertising.Results Twenty-five percent of the 446 practices sampled in 2011 had a website, compared to 44% of the 436 practices sampled in 2014. The principles best complied with were; displaying the name, geographic address, and telephone number of the practice (100% for both years). None of the websites compared the qualifications or skills of its practitioners to others, therefore 100% complied with this principle. Displaying team members' professional qualification and the country from which this is obtained was fairly well represented; 92% and 61% respectively in 2014; an improvement from only 50% and 49% respectively in 2011. Principles worst complied with were displaying the GDC's address (3% 2011; 9% 2014) or link to the GDC website (11% 2011; 7% 2014) and details of the practice complaints procedure (1% 2011; 5% 2014). Overall, no practice complied with all of the compulsory principles.Conclusion In both 2011 and 2014 no practice website was compliant with all the principles outlined in the 2012 GDC document Principles of ethical advertising. Reflecting results from previous studies, this study showed that compliance is slowly improving, yet over 4 years after the introduction of the mandatory principles, it remains that no practice website is 100% compliant.

The informative value and design of orthodontic practice websites in The Netherlands

“…Ethical compliance of the websites of orthodontic and dental practices to the existing EU regulations has been so far indirectly investigated in the UK, using the GDC guidelines based on CED recommendations. These studies concluded that despite the progress made over time, UK orthodontic practice websites generally failed to comply with GDC instructions [2,[7][8][9]. In this sense, nearly 1 out of 10 orthodontic websites fully complied with the principles outlined by GDC [2].…”

“…According to the results of the present study, 26% of the examined Dutch websites were entirely compliant to CED mandatory items, with the provider's registration number being specified though, in less than half of the cases. Professional registration details were reported at higher rates ranging from 53 to 84% of orthodontic practices examined elsewhere [2,8,9]. On the contrary, such information was suboptimally provided by the UK and Dutch dental practice websites, viz., 19 and 27%, respectively [6,11].…”

“…On the contrary, such information was suboptimally provided by the UK and Dutch dental practice websites, viz., 19 and 27%, respectively [6,11]. With respect to CED discretionary information, a link to a professional association was most frequently lacking but the websites outpaced previous reports [2,[7][8][9].…”

“…In line with European guidance, the General Dental Council (GDC) in the UK has produced an ethical framework for regulating dental advertising by practice websites [5]. However, compliance of UK dental and orthodontic practices to GDC core principles is generally poor and rather slowly improving [2,[6][7][8][9].…”

Evaluation of the information provided by UK dental practice websites regarding complications of dental implants

“…In this study however, the focus was placed on dental practice websites as patients are expected to initially turn to these for more information regarding treatment, costs, and procedures. There are a growing number of dental practice websites 18,23,24,25 . These websites do not detract from the responsibility of clinicians in providing individualised patient information and obtaining informed consent, however they can provide a reliable source of supplemental information.…”