Readability and quality of online information for patients pertaining to revision knee arthroplasty: An objective analysis

Readability of online patient education materials for shoulder instability surgery in English and Spanish

BACKGROUND

Online patient education materials (OPEMs) exist to inform patient medical decisions, yet the average adult in the United States reads at an eighth-grade level and 50% of Medicaid patients read at or below a fifth-grade level. To appropriately meet US health literacy needs, the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health recommend that patient education materials not exceed a sixth-grade level. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the readability of English and Spanish online patient education materials pertaining to shoulder instability surgery.

METHODS

Google searches of the terms "shoulder instability surgery" and "cirugía de inestabilidad de hombro'' were conducted to include 25 eligible online patient education materials OPEMs per language. English OPEM readability was calculated using Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch Reading Ease Grade Level, Gunning-Fog Index, Coleman-Liau Index, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook. Spanish OPEM readability was assessed using Fernandez-Huerta Index (FHI) (the Spanish equivalent of Flesch Reading Ease), FHI Grade Level, Gutiérrez de Polini's Fórmula de comprensibilidad, and INFLESZ.

RESULTS

Readability index analysis revealed that the mean Flesch Reading Ease of English online patient education materials was significantly lower than the mean FHI of Spanish online patient education materials. English materials were also found to be written at a significantly higher grade level than Spanish materials.

CONCLUSIONS

Shoulder instability surgery online patient education materials in both English and Spanish are written at higher reading levels than recommended by the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health, though Spanish online patient education materials were more readable on average.

Readability and Quality of Online Patient Education Materials Concerning Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Objective This study aimed to assess the quality of online patient educational materials regarding posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction. Methods We performed a search of the top-50 results on Google® (terms: "posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction," "PCL reconstruction," "posterior cruciate ligament surgery," and "PCL surgery") and subsequently filtered to rule out duplicated/inaccessible websites or those containing only videos (67 websites included). Readability was assessed using six formulas: Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKG), Gunning Fog Score (GF), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index, Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Automated Readability Index (ARI); quality was assessed using the JAMA benchmark criteria and recording the presence of the HONcode seal. Results The mean FRE was 49.3 (SD 11.2) and the mean FKG level was 8.09. These results were confirmed by the other readability formulae (average: GF 8.9; SMOG Index 7.3; CLI 14.7; ARI 6.5). A HONcode seal was available for 7.4 % of websites. The average JAMA score was 1.3. Conclusion The reading level of online patient materials concerning PCL reconstruction is too high for the average reader, requiring high comprehension skills. Practice implications Online medical information has been shown to influence patient healthcare decision processes. Patient-oriented educational materials should be clear and easy to understand.

Readability of Online Information for Parents Concerning Paediatric In-Toeing: An Analysis of the Most Popular Online Public Sources

Background Parents often access online resources to educate themselves on their child's condition. In-toeing, also referred to as pigeon toeing, is a common paediatric condition that has a variety of causes and is often a cause of concern for parents. With the increasing usage of the internet, parents of children with this condition may look to the web for answers. However, to be understood by the average adult, online health information must be written at an elementary school reading level. We hypothesised that currently available online resources regarding in-toeing would score poorly on objective measures of readability and understandability. Methods Patient education materials were identified via three commonly used online search engines (Google.com, Yahoo.com, and Bing.com). The terms "intoeing" and "pigeon toeing" were used for the search. From the top 50 search results, websites were included if directed at educating patients and their families regarding in-toeing. News articles, non-text material (video), industry websites, and articles not related to in-toeing were excluded. The readability was analysed using a specialised website www.readable.com to produce the following three scores: Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), and Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG). Understandability was calculated using the 19-point Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). Results After removing duplicates, 84 unique websites were assessed for inclusion. A total of 48 websites and articles (57.14%) met the inclusion criteria. Of note, 23 articles out of 84 (27.38%) were excluded as they were intended for healthcare professionals. The means for the FRE, FKG, and GFI were 57.92 (±12.26), 7.92 (±1.91), and 9.35 (±2.36), respectively. Less than half of online resources had an FRE score at or higher than the recommended reading level for the general population. Mean understandability scores were 69.63% (±11.55%), with only 45.83% of articles being greater than the 70% requirement of adequate understandability. Conclusion Overall, online in-toeing educational materials scored poorly with respect to readability and understandability. Given the popularity of online resources in patient education, we should seek to improve this situation. Articles that are easier to read are thus more accessible to the general public and will aid in the shared decision-making process. Improved patient and parent satisfaction and overall standard of care can be expected.

Digital Health Literacy: Evaluating the Readability and Reliability of Cochlear Implant Patient Information on the Web

Hearing aids and implants are used to treat hearing loss, with cochlear implants being the most successful option for severe sensorineural hearing loss. Patients frequently use the internet as a trusted source of clinical information before committing to any therapeutic procedure, including receiving a cochlear implant. A health resource's readability and dependability influence its value to patients. Readability refers to how easily language can be understood, whereas reliability refers to the correctness and consistency of the information presented. JAMA standards and the DISCERN tool were used to assess the reliability of the websites listed. For readability analysis, the FRE, FKG and GFI were chosen. The acceptable readability level was set to < 7 for the FKG, GF score over 17 as the equivalent of college-level education and ≥ 80.0 for the FRE. The readability scores vary across the sources, suggesting a range of comprehension levels required for understanding the cochlear implant patient information found on Google. There was a statistical difference detected in Discern score between the groups (p = 0.008). The mean discern score was significantly higher in hospital generated sources when compared to industry (3.13 ± 0.69 vs. 2.11 ± 0.78, p = 0.03).

A multimetric health literacy analysis of online gender affirmation surgery materials: From facial to genital surgery

BACKGROUND

The transgender patient population is expanding, and gender affirming surgery (GAS) volume is increasing. Accurate, comprehensive, and easily navigable resources on GAS are lacking. We aim to evaluate the readability of online materials for specific gender affirming surgical procedures to identify mechanisms of improving information access for transgender patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

"Facial feminization", "facial masculinization", "MTF breast augmentation", "FTM chest masculinization", "MTF vaginoplasty", "metoidioplasty", and "FTM phalloplasty" were searched on Google. Per keyword, the first 75 text-containing results were included. Text was analyzed for reading difficulty using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading-Ease (FKRE) test and grade level using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) formula, Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Coleman-Liau Index (CLI). Scores were compared using independent t-and ANOVA tests (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Mean readability scores (FKRE 37.44) and grade-levels (FKGL 12.87, GFI 15.61, SMOG 11.91, CLI 15.00) correlated with college-level difficulty. Masculinizing surgical materials were more difficult to read than feminizing ones (p ≤ 0.023). Top surgery materials were easier to read than facial and genital surgery materials (p ≤ 0.013). Specifically, chest masculinization resources were more difficult to read than those for breast augmentation (p ≤ 0.006). No differences were found between facial feminization and masculinization surgery resources, nor between resources for different gender affirming genital surgeries.

CONCLUSION

Online GAS materials are written above the recommended 6th grade reading-level, with resources for transgender men being significantly more challenging to understand. Improving readability of online resources can help overcome barriers to care for the transgender patient population.

From quality to clarity: evaluating the effectiveness of online ınformation related to septic arthritis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the content, readability, and quality of online resources on septic arthritis, a crucial orthopedic condition necessitating immediate diagnosis and treatment to avert serious complications, with a particular focus on the relevance to individuals from the general public.

METHODS

Two search terms ("septic arthritis" and "joint infection") were input into three different search engines on the Internet (Google, Yahoo, and Bing) and 60 websites were evaluated, with the top 20 results in each search engine. The websites underwent categorization based on their type, and their content and quality were assessed utilizing the DISCERN score, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, the Global Quality Score (GQS), and the Information Value Score (IVS). The readability of the text was assessed through the utilization of the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FKRS). The presence or absence of the Health on Net (HON) code was evaluated on each website.

RESULTS

The DISCERN, JAMA, GQS, FKGL, and IVS scores of the academic category were found to be substantially greater when compared with the physician, medical, and commercial categories. But at the same time, academic sites had high readability scores. Websites with HON code had significantly higher average FKGL, FCRS, DISCERN, JAMA, GQS, and IVS scores than those without.

CONCLUSION

The quality of websites giving information on septic arthritis was variable and not optimal. Although the content of the academic group was of higher quality, it could be difficult to understand. One of the key responsibilities of healthcare professionals should be to provide high quality and comprehensible information concerning joint infections on reputable academic platforms, thereby facilitating patients in attaining a fundamental level of health literacy.

Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

As the demand for total joint arthroplasty continues to grow, patients increasingly turn to internet sources for accessible orthopaedic health information. We sought to evaluate the readability of online hip and knee arthroplasty patient education materials (PEMs).

METHODS

Our systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-P guidelines (PROSPERO registration of the study protocol: CRD42022358872, September 19th, 2022). PubMed, EBSCOhost, Medline, and Google Scholar electronic databases were utilized to identify all studies evaluating online PEMs related to total joint arthroplasty between January 1, 2000, and August 1, 2022. The quality of studies was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute scale.

RESULTS

Our initial search yielded 360 publications which were then screened for appropriate studies aligned with our review's purpose. A total of eleven cross-sectional studies were included. The total sample size across the studies consisted of 662 PEMs. Five studies evaluated professional or academic orthopaedic websites, six evaluated PEMs through web engines, and three evaluated apps or commercial websites. Most included studies found PEMs to be well above the recommended 6th-grade reading level.

CONCLUSION

Arthroplasty PEMs produced by orthopaaedic websites, web searches, and apps have readability scores well above the recommended levels. Given the importance of health literacy on patient outcomes and satisfaction, work needs to be done to improve the readability of these materials.

Patient education information material assessment criteria: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient education information material (PEIM) is an essential component of patient education programs in increasing patients' ability to cope with their diseases. Therefore, it is essential to consider the criteria that will be used to prepare and evaluate these resources.

OBJECTIVE

This paper aims to identify these criteria and recognize the tools or methods used to evaluate them.

METHODS

National and international databases and indexing banks, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, the Cochrane Library, Magiran, SID and ISC, were searched for this review. Original or review articles, theses, short surveys, and conference papers published between January 1990 and June 2022 were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 4688 documents were retrieved, of which 298 documents met the inclusion criteria. The criteria were grouped into 24 overarching criteria. The most frequently used criteria were readability, quality, suitability, comprehensibility and understandability.

CONCLUSION

This review has provided empirical evidence to identify criteria, tools, techniques or methods for developing or evaluating a PEIM. The authors suggest that developing a comprehensive tool based on these findings is critical for evaluating the overall efficiency of PEIM using effective criteria.