JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Repairing instead of replacing partially defective restorations represents a minimal-invasive treatment concept and repairs are associated with a number of advantages over complete restoration replacement. To allow patients to participate in the shared decision-making process when facing partially defective restorations, patients need to be aware of the indications, limitations, and advantages or disadvantages of repairs. Patients are increasingly using the internet to gain health information like this online.

Objective:

We aimed to assess the quality of German dentists’ websites on repairs of partially defective restorations.

Methods:

Three electronic search engines were to identify German websites of dental practices mentioning repairs. Regarding information on repairs, websites were assessed for (1) technical/functional aspects, (2) comprehensiveness of information, and (3) generic quality/risk of bias. Domains 1+3 were scored using validated tools (LIDA/DISCERN). Comprehensiveness was assessed using a criterion catalogue related to evidence, (dis-)advantages, restorations/defects being suitable for repair, and information regarding technical implementation. Generalized-linear modelling (GLM) was used to assess the impact of practice-specific parameters (practice location, practice setting, dental society membership, year of examination / license to practice dentistry) on the quality of information. An overall quality score was calculated by averaging the quality scores of all three domains and used as primary outcome parameter. Quality scores of all three domains were also assessed individually and used as secondary outcomes.

Results:

Fifty websites were included. The median (25th/75th percentiles) of quality of information was 23.2% (21.7/26.2%). Technical/functional aspects (55.2% [51.7/58.6%]) showed significantly higher quality than the comprehensiveness of information (8.3% [8.3/16.7%]) and generic quality/risk of bias (3.6% [0.0/7.1%]), respectively (P<.001/Wilcoxon). Quality scores were not related to practice-specific parameters (P>.05/GLM).

Conclusions:

The quality of German dentists’ websites towards repair was limited. Despite sufficient technical and functional quality, the provided information were neither comprehensive nor trustworthy. There is great need to improve the quality of information to fully and reliably inform patients, thereby allowing shared decision-making.