Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Dentistry
Full Version
Expectations From Orthodontic Treatment Patient / Parent Perspective
Correspondence Address :
Rohit Duggal, MDS
Professor,
Department Of Orthodontics
Dasmesh Institute Of Research And Dental Sciences
Faridkot-151203
Punjab
EMAIL: - rohitduggal4@hotmail.com
Mobile No: - 09876050321
The purpose of this study was to investigate the expectations of children and their parents towards orthodontic treatment. A total of 200 subjects (100 patients and 100 parents) who were attending for their first visit, completed the questionnaire in the Department of Orthodontics at the Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot. The children were aged between 10 to 15 years. The response of the children and one of the parents was examined by using parametric statistical methods. The patients and their parents had different expectations, as shown by the statistical analysis. Hence, effective communication between the orthodontist and the patients and their parents is considered to be essential.
Introduction
The primary goal for most of the patients who seek orthodontic treatment is a discernible improvement in some aspect of his / her dentofacial appearance. Orthodontic therapy, to their way of thinking, is something that makes people look better and feel better about themselves and perhaps, something that enhances their ability to socially interact with others. The dental profession has fostered the notion that enhanced occlusion improves the health and longevity of the dentition, and so, in effect, many patients who seek orthodontic care state that their secondary goal of treatment is an oral health benefit (1).
Thus, orthodontic treatment aims at getting results which gel with the patients’ personality and makes him / her to look more aesthetic.
Renske Hiemstra (2) found that the expectations of the patients and their parents differed on several aspects. Effective communication between the orthodontist and the patients and their parents is considered to be essential.
Phillips et al. (3) found that the patients’ main reason for seeking orthodontics is to correct dentofacial disharmony. Males have different expectations of orthodontic treatment than females. Males have a strong motivation for social well-being, while females focus on improved appearance as its own reward. Satisfaction with facial body image decreases with age and adults are more dissatisfied with their dentofacial appearance than children (4),(5),(6),(7). Patients who are satisfied with the appearance of their teeth, have different expectations of orthodontic treatment than patients who are dissatisfied and older patients expect more improvement in their self image than the younger patients. Bernabe´ et al. (8) reported that it is widely known that orthodontic treatment occasionally causes pain, discomfort and functional limitations. The patients’ self confidence during treatment might be affected by speech impairment and the visibility of the appliance. (9) Also, the discomfort caused by orthodontic treatment may affect the patients’ compliance and satisfaction with treatment and it might lead to stress between the patient and the practitioner. (10),(11)
Previous studies have measured the subjects’ expectations of orthodontic treatment after their initial consultation or during treatment, (12),(13) or have measured only the expectations of the orthodontic treatment of the parents and not that of their children (14). Few studies have measured both the patients’ and parents’ expectations prior to their first consultation (7),(15),(16). In a recent study, the expectations of orthodontic treatment of the patients and their parents were measured by using a validated questionnaire, prior to their initial appointment (15). The patients and their parents showed similar expectations of treatment, except for having an orthodontic appliance fitted at their first visit, the expectations of the duration of orthodontic treatment and dietary and drinking restrictions as a result of orthodontic treatment. (15)
The aim of this study was to examine expectations of the patients and their parents from orthodontic treatment on their first visit to their visit to the Department of Orthodontics at the Dasmesh Institue of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot. We used a questionnaire which was originally developed by Sayers and Newton. (15),(16).
A total of 200 subjects (100 patients and 100 parents) who were attending for their first visit, completed the questionnaire at the Department of Orthodontics at the Dasmesh Institue of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot. The children were aged between 10 to 15 years.
As used by Sayers and Newton,(15),(16) a visual analogue scale marked at 10-mm intervals, was used as the response scale for all questions, except questions 8 and 9. Scores on the visual analogue scale were calculated by measuring the distance to the mark in mm from the left hand side of the VAS. ‘0’ represented ‘extremely unlikely’ and ‘100’ represented ‘extremely likely’. Question 8 and 9 had different response options.
A questionnaire was used to measure the patients’ and their parent’s expectations about the orthodontic treatment.
Questionnaire
1. At your initial appointment do you expect to:
A. Have a check-up and diagnosis?
B. Have a discussion about treatment?
C. Have X-rays?
D. Have photographs taken?
E. Have impressions?
F. Have oral hygiene checked?
G. Have restorations?
H. Have a brace fitted?
2. What type of orthodontic treatment do you expect?
A. Fixed braces?
B. Removable braces?
C. Teeth extracted?
D. Headgear?
E. Jaw surgery?
3. Do you think wearing braces will be painful?
4. Do you think orthodontic treatment will produce problems with eating or drinking?
5. How do you think people will react to you wearing a brace?
6. Do you expect orthodontic treatment to:
A. Straighten your teeth?
B. Produce a better smile?
C. Improve your facial appearance?
D. Make it easier to eat?
E. Improvement in speech?
F. Make it easier to keep my teeth clean?
G. Improve my chances of a good career?
H. Boost my confidence?
I. Interfere with studies?
7. Do you think the treatment will be expensive?
8. How long do you expect orthodontic treatment to take?
< 1 year
1–1.5 years
1.6–2 years
>2–3 years
>3 years
Don’t know
9. How often do you think you will need to attend for check up?
< 1 month
1–2 months
> 2–3 months
> 3–6 months
> 6 months
Don’t know
10. Do you think about any post treatment complications?
Statistical Analysis
The responses provided by the patients and their parents to the questionnaire was entered and analyzed. The data was examined and the differences in the responses to each item of thequestionnaire between the patients and their parents was tested by using paired sample t tests.
The responses to questions 8 and 9 were categorical and were not answered on a visual analogue scale. Item 8 and 9 had 11 and 10 response options, respectively.
All patients and their parents completed the questionnaire and no one refused to participate. The mean age of the children was 12.6 years (SD 1.2).
Comparison of patient and parent expectations
(Table/Fig 1): Shows the comparison of responses to each questionnaire item for the children compared with their parents.
Patients, as well as parents, had similar expectations with regards to having the fixed / removable brace (question 2A, 2B), regarding the headgear (question 2D) and jaw surgery (question 2E) and regarding whether orthodontic treatment would produce problems with eating / drinking (question 4).
Similar expectations were observed between the patients as well as their parents regarding the orthodontic treatment to straighten teeth, produce a better smile , improve facial appearance and to make it easier to eat and for improvement in speech (question 6 A,B,C,D,E).
Patients and their parents had different opinions regarding the remaining questionnaire, as shown by the statistical analysis.
(Table/Fig 2) and (Table/Fig 3) shows the descriptive statistics for questions 8 and 9. 26 patients had no idea about the duration of orthodontic treatment as compared to 8 parents. Nearly twice as many parents as the patients expected the orthodontic treatment to be finished within 1 – 1.5 years. (Table/Fig 3) shows that more than 50% expected to visit once a month and that patients were more ignorant as compared to their parents regarding the frequency of their appointment.
(Table/Fig 2): Expectations as to the duration of orthodontic treatment (question 8)
(Table/Fig 3) Expectations as to the frequency of appointments (question 9)
This study found some differences in the expectations of orthodontic treatment between the patients and their parents. Some patients/parents might have friends or relatives wearing braces and this might have changed their expectations.
Concerning the reliability and the validity of the questionnaire, it can be said that the questionnaire which was used in the study of Sayers and Newton was both valid and reliable. (15),(16)
It is not enough to translate a questionnaire literally. An additional challenge is to adapt it in a culturally relevant and comprehensible form while maintaining the meaning and intention of the original items; (17) however, even when the translation process is successfully implemented, the validity of the results might be suspicious. To increase the validity of our study, a pilot study was carried out before the questionnaire was distributed to all participants. The study was designed in such a way that the parents could not assist their children in answering the questionnaire, as they were observed by one of the interns. We therefore feel confident to say that the responses of the children reflect their true feelings and not what their parents suggested to them. Several results from the present study are different to the results found in previous studies.
Tung and Kiyak (12) stated that parents expected a higher increase in the social confidence of their children as a result of orthodontic treatment, than their children. This was not found in the present study. Also, a considerable amount of discomfort during orthodontic treatment was anticipated by patients in previous studies, (18),(10),(11) which was not found in this study. Some of our results agree with those of previous studies. Many children in the Netherlands are wearing braces. (19)
In clinical practice, age-appropriate communication concerning what can be expected from orthodontic treatment is essential to achieve good cooperation from the patient. Effective communication is needed, because of the differences in cognitive development among the children and their parents.
It is fundamental for the clinician to direct the attention to the person in the chair and not only to the accompanying parent. (20) Before starting the treatment, orthodontists should always ask their patients how they feel about their dental appearance and what they expect from the orthodontic treatment. They should give extensive instructions on what people in fact can expect with regards to pain, limitations and discomfort. This strategy may lead to less disappointment and more satisfied patients and may improve the quality of orthodontic care.
This study provides a validated measure of the orthodontic expectations of 10 to 15 year old patients and their parents before their initial orthodontic consultation regarding their initial appointment, type of treatment, expected experiences during treatment, duration of treatment, the frequency of their visits and the benefits of orthodontic treatment.
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com