Orthodontist-Patient Communication: A Cross-Sectional Study among Private Practitioners

Introduction: Communication between the orthodontist and the patient is a cornerstone of therapeutic success, shaping adherence, satisfaction, and cooperation throughout treatment. Emerging tools such as teleorthodontics and social media offer new opportunities for improvement, yet their place in daily practice remains poorly defined. This study aimed to assess orthodontists’ communication practices, identify their limitations, and explore avenues for improvement. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among orthodontists in private practice in Casablanca. Of 304 orthodontists identified in the registry of the National Council of the Order of Dentists of Morocco and invited to participate, 102 returned complete, analyzable questionnaires (response rate 33.6%). Data were collected through an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire. Results: Most practitioners (77.5%) saw their patients on a monthly basis and favored direct face-to-face communication (88.2%). The first consultation lasted 10 to 20 minutes for 59.8% of respondents, yet visual aids were used systematically by only 43.1% of practitioners. Teleorthodontics remained underused (29.4%), despite being perceived as useful for aligner monitoring and initial consultations. The main areas of patient misunderstanding involved oral hygiene (68.6%), treatment duration (44.1%), and appliance maintenance (42.2%). Overall, 51% of orthodontists perceived their patients as satisfied with the communication provided, and 50% considered treatment adherence satisfactory. Post-treatment follow-up was maintained by 72.5% of practitioners, though with highly variable modalities. Finally, most practitioners expressed a need for more comprehensive visual aids (71.6%) and digital applications (52%) to strengthen communication. Discussion: Our findings were compared with results from studies conducted in other countries, and recommendations were proposed to improve communication between orthodontists and patients, both within the practice and remotely. These recommendations offer perspectives for optimizing patient interactions, enhancing remote support, and ultimately improving orthodontic treatment outcomes while ensuring their long-term stability through regular follow-up. Conclusion: Optimizing orthodontic communication requires clearer structuring of consultations, the systematic use of visual and digital tools, and ongoing practitioner training. Such improvements would strengthen patient cooperation, satisfaction, and treatment durability, positioning orthodontic practice within a modern, ethical, and patient-centered approach.