Exploratory study assesses QR codes for delivering preventive oral health information, suggesting high patient preference.
Background: The integration of Quick Response (QR) codes into healthcare offers a modern solution for efficient and cost-effective information dissemination. Given Saudi Arabia’s high smartphone penetration rate, QR codes hold significant potential for enhancing preventive oral healthcare. Objective: This study aims to assess the effectiveness of QR codes in providing preventive oral health information leaflets (PILs), focusing on patient awareness, ease of use, and preferences compared to traditional paper leaflets. Methods: A questionnaire-based survey was conducted among 118 participants, predominantly middle-aged and well-educated. The study assessed familiarity with QR codes, their actual usage, and patient preferences for accessing healthcare information via mobile technology or paper PILs. Chi-square tests were used to analyze the associations between demographics and preferences. Results: The study found universal awareness of QR codes among participants, with 44.1% reporting prior usage. A majority (91.5%) preferred accessing healthcare information via mobile devices, with 80.5% favoring QR codes over leaflets for their convenience and accessibility. No significant differences were observed in preferences across gender or educational levels, although women were more likely to require assistance. Participants highlighted the ease of sharing healthcare information through QR codes (87.3%). Conclusion: QR codes are widely recognized as effective tools for patient education, particularly in preventive oral healthcare. Their ease of use, accessibility, and strong preference over traditional methods underscore their potential in healthcare communication. Further research is needed to address barriers to broader adoption and assess long-term impacts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharanesha et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: