Readability of Patient Education Materials for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Clinical Spine Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1097/BSD.0000000000001769

Anil Sedani, Eric Kholodovsky, Justin Trapana, Evan Trapana

{"title":"Readability of Patient Education Materials for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.","authors":"Anil Sedani, Eric Kholodovsky, Justin Trapana, Evan Trapana","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001769","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Study design: Descriptive study.Summary of background data: Patients commonly use online patient education materials (PEM) to learn about anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the readability of patient education materials on anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Methods: The Google search engine was queried using the term \"Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion patient information.\" The first 25 websites meeting inclusion criteria for this term were evaluated. Readability scores were automatically calculated by transferring the texts to http://www.readabilityformulas.com. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each measure using SPSS version 28.0.0.Results: The mean average reading level was 9.2±2.4. The mean readability score out of 100 for the FK Reading Ease Score was 55.2±8.6. The remaining scores were: Gunning Fog, 12.7±2.2; FK Grade Level, 8.9±2.0; The Coleman Liau Index, 11.0±1.7; SMOG Index, 48.1±197.0; Automated Readability Index, 8.1±3.11; Linsear Write Formula, 9.8±2.1. Only 2 of the PEMs were written at or below a sixth grade level and only 7 were written at or below an eighth grade reading level.Conclusion: Patient readability is an important component of patient care and the current readability level of ACDF PEMs is insufficient. At their current state, PEMs may not allow a significant portion of the population to understand the nature of their condition and procedure properly.Level of evidence: Level III.","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001769","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Descriptive study.

Summary of background data: Patients commonly use online patient education materials (PEM) to learn about anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the readability of patient education materials on anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Methods: The Google search engine was queried using the term "Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion patient information." The first 25 websites meeting inclusion criteria for this term were evaluated. Readability scores were automatically calculated by transferring the texts to http://www.readabilityformulas.com. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each measure using SPSS version 28.0.0.

Results: The mean average reading level was 9.2±2.4. The mean readability score out of 100 for the FK Reading Ease Score was 55.2±8.6. The remaining scores were: Gunning Fog, 12.7±2.2; FK Grade Level, 8.9±2.0; The Coleman Liau Index, 11.0±1.7; SMOG Index, 48.1±197.0; Automated Readability Index, 8.1±3.11; Linsear Write Formula, 9.8±2.1. Only 2 of the PEMs were written at or below a sixth grade level and only 7 were written at or below an eighth grade reading level.

Conclusion: Patient readability is an important component of patient care and the current readability level of ACDF PEMs is insufficient. At their current state, PEMs may not allow a significant portion of the population to understand the nature of their condition and procedure properly.

Level of evidence: Level III.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Clinical Spine Surgery Medicine-Surgery

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

5.30%

发文量

236

期刊介绍： Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure. Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.