Health Literacy in Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Quantitative Assessment of the Understandability and Readability of Online Patient Education Material.

The Iowa orthopaedic journal Pub Date : 2024-01-01
Olivia C O'Reilly, Mary K Skalitzky, Kyle K Kesler, Alan G Shamrock, Burke Gao, Trevor R Gulbrandsen, Matthew J Bollier
{"title":"Health Literacy in Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Quantitative Assessment of the Understandability and Readability of Online Patient Education Material.","authors":"Olivia C O'Reilly, Mary K Skalitzky, Kyle K Kesler, Alan G Shamrock, Burke Gao, Trevor R Gulbrandsen, Matthew J Bollier","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and American Medical Association (AMA) recommend that online health information be written at a maximum 6th grade reading level. The aim was to evaluate online resources regarding shoulder arthroscopy utilizing measures of readability, understandability, and actionability, using syntax reading grade level and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT-P).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online Google™ search utilizing \"shoulder arthroscopy\" was performed. From the top 50 results, websites directed at educating patients were included. News and scientific articles, audiovisual materials, industry websites, and unrelated materials were excluded. Readability was calculated using objective algorithms: Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) grade, Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Gunning-Fog Index (GFI). The PEMAT-P was used to assess understandability and actionability, with a 70% score threshold. Scores were compared across academic institutions, private practices, and commercial health publishers. The correlation between search rank and readability, understandability, and actionability was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two independent searches yielded 53 websites, with 44 (83.02%) meeting inclusion criteria. No mean readability score performed below a 10th grade reading level. Only one website scored at or below 6th grade reading level. Mean understandability and actionability scores were 63.02%±12.09 and 29.77%±20.63, neither of which met the PEMAT threshold. Twelve (27.27%) websites met the understandability threshold, while none met the actionability threshold. Institution categories scored similarly in understandability (61.71%, 62.68%, 63.67%) among academic, private practice, and commercial health publishers respectively (p=0.9536). No readability or PEMAT score correlated with search rank.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Online shoulder arthroscopy patient education materials score poorly in readability, understandability, and actionability. One website scored at the NIH and AMA recommended reading level, and 27.27% of websites scored above the 70% PEMAT score for understandability. None met the actionability threshold. Future efforts should improve online resources to optimize patient education and facilitate informed decision-making. <b>Level of Evidence: IV</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":94233,"journal":{"name":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","volume":"44 1","pages":"151-158"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195902/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and American Medical Association (AMA) recommend that online health information be written at a maximum 6th grade reading level. The aim was to evaluate online resources regarding shoulder arthroscopy utilizing measures of readability, understandability, and actionability, using syntax reading grade level and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT-P).

Methods: An online Google™ search utilizing "shoulder arthroscopy" was performed. From the top 50 results, websites directed at educating patients were included. News and scientific articles, audiovisual materials, industry websites, and unrelated materials were excluded. Readability was calculated using objective algorithms: Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) grade, Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Gunning-Fog Index (GFI). The PEMAT-P was used to assess understandability and actionability, with a 70% score threshold. Scores were compared across academic institutions, private practices, and commercial health publishers. The correlation between search rank and readability, understandability, and actionability was calculated.

Results: Two independent searches yielded 53 websites, with 44 (83.02%) meeting inclusion criteria. No mean readability score performed below a 10th grade reading level. Only one website scored at or below 6th grade reading level. Mean understandability and actionability scores were 63.02%±12.09 and 29.77%±20.63, neither of which met the PEMAT threshold. Twelve (27.27%) websites met the understandability threshold, while none met the actionability threshold. Institution categories scored similarly in understandability (61.71%, 62.68%, 63.67%) among academic, private practice, and commercial health publishers respectively (p=0.9536). No readability or PEMAT score correlated with search rank.

Conclusion: Online shoulder arthroscopy patient education materials score poorly in readability, understandability, and actionability. One website scored at the NIH and AMA recommended reading level, and 27.27% of websites scored above the 70% PEMAT score for understandability. None met the actionability threshold. Future efforts should improve online resources to optimize patient education and facilitate informed decision-making. Level of Evidence: IV.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肩关节镜检查中的健康素养:定量评估在线患者教育材料的可理解性和可读性。
背景:美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)和美国医学会(AMA)建议,在线健康信息最多应以六年级的阅读水平编写。本研究的目的是利用句法阅读水平和患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT-P),通过可读性、可理解性和可操作性的衡量标准,对有关肩关节镜检查的在线资源进行评估:方法: 使用 "肩关节镜 "进行在线 Google™ 搜索。方法:利用 "肩关节镜 "进行在线 Google™ 搜索,从排名前 50 位的结果中选取了旨在教育患者的网站。排除了新闻和科学文章、视听材料、行业网站和无关材料。使用客观算法计算可读性:Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL)、Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) grade、Coleman-Liau Index (CLI) 和 Gunning-Fog Index (GFI)。PEMAT-P 用于评估可理解性和可操作性,分数阈值为 70%。对学术机构、私人诊所和商业健康出版商的得分进行了比较。计算了搜索排名与可读性、可理解性和可操作性之间的相关性:通过两次独立搜索,共找到 53 个网站,其中 44 个(83.02%)符合纳入标准。没有一个网站的平均可读性得分低于 10 年级的阅读水平。只有一个网站的得分达到或低于六年级的阅读水平。可理解性和可操作性的平均得分分别为 63.02%±12.09 和 29.77%±20.63,均未达到 PEMAT 临界值。有 12 个网站(27.27%)达到了可理解性阈值,但没有一个达到可操作性阈值。学术、私人执业和商业健康出版商在可理解性方面的机构类别得分相似(分别为 61.71%、62.68% 和 63.67%)(P=0.9536)。可读性或PEMAT得分与搜索排名没有关联:结论:在线肩关节镜患者教育材料在可读性、可理解性和可操作性方面得分较低。一个网站的得分达到了 NIH 和 AMA 推荐的阅读水平,27.27% 的网站在可理解性方面的得分超过了 70% 的 PEMAT 分数。没有一个网站达到可操作性标准。未来应努力改进在线资源,以优化患者教育并促进知情决策。证据等级:IV级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pain Management for Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Systematic Review. Peri-Operative Management of Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Report of Current Practices from the Anchor Group, Supporting Literature, and Areas for Future Investigation. Posterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries in Very Young Children - A Case Report and Modern Review. Predicting Septic Arthritis in the Setting of Crystalline Arthropathy in the Native Joint Using Laboratory Data. Predictive Factors for Intraoperative Determination for the Need of Femoral Osteochondroplasty After Periacetabular Osteotomy for Acetabular Dysplasia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1