Awareness, Perceptions, and Knowledge Gaps Regarding Cranial Remolding Orthosis: A Cross-Sectional Survey Analysis

Background: : Cranial remolding orthosis (CRO) is a custom-fabricated, non-invasive helmet used in selected infants with positional cranial deformities. Awareness alone may not ensure timely assessment or appropriate referral if caregivers and healthcare professionals have incomplete knowledge of the treatment window, duration, or practical requirements. Objective: To assess awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and concerns regarding CRO among respondents reached through professional and academic networks. Methods: : A quantitative, descriptive cross-sectional online survey was completed by 112 respondents. The questionnaire covered demographic characteristics, prior awareness and information sources, knowledge of CRO indications and treatment characteristics, perceptions of effectiveness, willingness to consider treatment, concerns, insurance coverage, early intervention, and open-ended feedback. Categorical responses were summarised using frequencies and percentages. Open-ended responses were reviewed thematically. Results: : Most respondents were healthcare professionals (106/112, 94.6%), and 102 (91.1%) reported having heard of CRO. Among those aware, medical professionals were the most frequently reported information source (88.4%). Although 98.2% were reported to identify plagiocephaly as the condition treated, only 28.6% selected the stated ideal age range and 42.0% identified the typical treatment duration. Perceived effectiveness was positive (91.0%), and 85.7% would consider CRO if recommended by a healthcare professional. Common concerns were child comfort (59.8%), cost (58.0%), and treatment duration (44.6%). Early intervention was rated very important by 94.6%; 87.5% supported insurance coverage. Open-ended feedback highlighted education, affordability, accessibility, and comfort. Conclusion: : The findings indicate high reported awareness in this predominantly healthcare-professional sample, alongside gaps in knowledge about treatment timing and duration. Educational initiatives should address these specific knowledge needs and explain practical and financial considerations. Because the sample was convenience-based and heavily weighted toward healthcare professionals, the results should not be generalised to the wider public.