
AbstractObjectiveTo determine the proportion of parents that have some knowledge of abnormal maxillary frenulum, or “lip tie,” and their sources of this information.Study DesignCross‐sectional study.SettingOtolaryngology clinic.MethodsConsecutive parents of children ≤12 years of age presenting at a pediatric otolaryngology clinic were surveyed to discover their understanding of “lip tie” in children. The survey included questions on the effects of “lip tie,” where they learned about “lip tie,” whether they thought their child had “lip tie,” whether they had a child undergo “lip tie” division, and how concerned they would be if they thought their child had “lip tie.” Information on participant demographics and social media was collected.ResultsOverall, 59.8% (193) of the 323 parents surveyed had heard of “lip tie”; of those, 17.1% (33) had a child that had undergone “lip tie” surgery. Most parents (91.2%, 176) thought “lip tie” caused breastfeeding problems. Roughly one‐quarter of parents (51 of 197 responses) rated their concern about “lip tie” as >8 of 10 on a Likert scale (mean, 5.7). The reported sources of “lip tie” information included lactation consultants (36.8%, 71), nurses (22.8%, 44), and pediatricians (31.6%, 61) as well as nonmedical sources, such as social media, family, and friends (68.4%, 132). Overall, 87% (282) of the 323 participants reported daily use of social media.ConclusionAlthough many parents are concerned about “lip tie,” much of their information on this condition comes from nonmedical sources. Social media would be a valuable platform to provide accurate information on “lip tie.”
frenotomy, Otorhinolaryngology, RF1-547, RD1-811, breastfeeding, social media, superior labial frenulum, Surgery, Original Research
frenotomy, Otorhinolaryngology, RF1-547, RD1-811, breastfeeding, social media, superior labial frenulum, Surgery, Original Research
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
