Readability of online patient-based information on bariatric surgery

Online Patient Resources for Birdshot Uveitis: How Readable are These Resources?

PURPOSE

Birdshot uveitis is a rare ophthalmic condition that can be challenging to control. The readability of online patient resources may impact the management of patients with birdshot. Thus, we examined the readability of online patient resources and identified differences in readability among sources and sections of websites.

METHODS

We queried 3 search engines (Google, Yahoo, Bing) for search results based on a series of terms related to birdshot uveitis. One hundred and twenty results were retrieved and 17 articles were assessed for readability analysis using validated readability and grade-level metrics. Articles were scored based on their entire textual content and, when feasible, also based on sections (e.g. background, diagnosis, treatment). Statistical analyses were conducted using ANOVA and Tukey's honestly significant difference.

RESULTS

The websites analyzed were from hospitals and academic centers (5), private practices (3), patient advocacy organizations (4), and other non-profits (5). On average, online patient resources are too difficult to read according to readability scores and grade levels ranging from late high school to college graduate. Articles written by non-profits other than advocacy organizations had an average of 6.5% more complex words than articles written by hospitals and academic centers (p < 0.05). Multiple metrics revealed that the treatment sections were less readable than the causes and symptoms sections.

CONCLUSION

The readability of online patient resources for birdshot far exceeds reading levels recommended by the AMA, NIH, and patient safety organizations. Efforts should be made to improve the readability of patient education materials and patient understanding of their disease.

Improving health literacy and stakeholder-directed knowledge of One Health through analysis of readability: a cross sectional infodemiology study

Background

The One Health approach involves collaboration across several sectors, including public health, veterinary and environmental sectors in an integrated manner. These sectors may be disparate and unrelated, however to succeed, all stakeholders need to understand what the other stakeholders are communicating. Likewise, it is important that there is public acceptance and support of One Health approaches, which requires effective communication between professional and institutional organisations and the public. To help aid and facilitate such communication, written materials need to be readable by all stakeholders, in order to communicate effectively. There has been an exponential increase in the publication of papers involving One Health, with <5 per year, in the 2000s, to nearly 500 published in 2023. To date, readability of One Health information has not been scrutinised, nor has it been considered as an integral intervention of One Health policy communication. The aim of this study was therefore to examine readability of public-facing One Health information prepared by 24 global organisations.

Methods

Readability was calculated using Readable software, to obtain four readability scores [(ⅰ) Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), (ⅱ) Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), (ⅲ) Gunning Fog Index and (ⅳ) SMOG Index] and two text metrics [words/sentence, syllables/word] for 100 sources of One Health information, from four categories [One Health public information; PubMed abstracts; Science in One Health (SOH) abstracts (articles); SOH abstracts (reviews)].

Results

Readability of One Health information for the public is poor, not reaching readability reference standards. No information was found that had a readability of less than 9th grade (around 14 years old). Mean values for the FRE and FKGL were (19.4 ± 1.4) (target >60) and (15.6 ± 0.3) (target <8), respectively, with mean words per sentence and syllables per word of 20.5 and 2.0, respectively. Abstracts with "One Health" in the title were more difficult to read than those without "One Health" in the title (FRE: P = 0.0337; FKGL: P = 0.0087). Comparison of FRE and FKGL readability scores for the four categories of One Health information [One Health public information; PubMed abstracts; SOH abstracts (articles); SOH abstracts (reviews)] showed that SOH abstracts from articles were easier to read than those from SOH reviews. No One Health public-facing information from the 100 sources examined met the FKGL target of ≤8. The most easily read One Health information required a Grade Level of 9th grade (14-15 years old), with a mean Grade Level of 15.5 (university/college level).

Conclusion

Considerable work is required in making One Health written materials more readable, particularly for children and adolescents (<14 years of age). It is important that any interventions or mitigations taken to support better public understanding of the One Health approach are not ephemeral, but have longer lasting and legacy value. Authors of One Health information should consider using readability calculators when preparing One Health information for their stakeholders, to check the readability of their work, so that the final material is within recommended readability reference parameters, to support the health literacy and stakeholder-directed knowledge of their readers.

Attitudes to cross infection, nebuliser hygiene and antimicrobial resistance in people with cystic fibrosis: Results of an international survey

BACKGROUND

Respiratory infection is a major cause of disease severity in people with cystic fibrosis (PwCF). This project aimed to establish the CF community's opinion regarding cross infection (CI), nebuliser hygiene, antimicrobial resistance, personal impact of microbiological findings and the role of the microbiology laboratory.

METHODS

A questionnaire was completed anonymously (n = 280; PwCF (n = 128), parents (n = 123); friends/family/carers/charity personnel (n = 29)) from 13 countries. Readability scores (Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL)) were determined for CI/IP&C information from six national CF charities and 21 scientific abstracts.

RESULTS

Respondents (72.5%) indicated knowledge of laboratory aspects of CF microbiology was important, however implications of microbiological findings on personal health/well-being were of higher importance (p < 0.0001). Cross infection/infection prevention & control (CI/IP&C) was of highest importance (95.6% respondents) with 27.3% indicating they were not given adequate information, particularly in older respondents (50 y+) (p = 0.006) versus young adults (16-29 y) and respondents from the Middle East versus N. America (p = 0.022) and Europe (p = 0.045). Responses highlighted how CI/IP&C health literacy could be enhanced. Respondents (77.3%), particularly females (p < 0.0001), indicated they would increase the frequency of nebuliser disinfection following guidance on infection risks/best practice, therefore an educational video was prepared. CI/IP&C readability scores (mean ± sd) from CF charities (FRE 52.5 ± 10.8; FKGL 9.7 ± 2.3) were more readable (p < 0.0001) than scientific abstracts (FRE 13.3 ± 11.1; FKGL 16.9 ± 2.3), however not meeting the targets (FRE≥60 and FKGL≤8).

CONCLUSION

There is a requirement for further CI/IP&C evidence-based guidance, policies/guidelines, education awareness, best practice in the home environment and multi-modal communication, enabling the CF community to make informed choices on lifestyle behaviours.

Readability of Patient-Facing Information of Antibiotics Used in the WHO Short 6-Month and 9-Month All Oral Treatment for Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis

OBJECTIVES

Readability of patient-facing information of oral antibiotics detailed in the WHO all oral short (6 months, 9 months) has not been described to date. The aim of this study was therefore to examine (i) how readable patient-facing TB antibiotic information is compared to readability reference standards and (ii) if there are differences in readability between high-incidence countries versus low-incidence countries.

METHODS

Ten antibiotics, including bedaquiline, clofazimine, ethambutol, ethionamide, isoniazid, levofloxacin, linezolid, moxifloxacin, pretomanid, pyrazinamide, were investigated. TB antibiotic information sources were examined, consisting of 85 Patient Information Leaflets (PILs) and 40 antibiotic web resouces. Of these 85 PILs, 72 were taken from the National Medicines Regulator from six countries (3 TB high-incidence [Rwanda, Malaysia, South Africa] + 3 TB low-incidence [UK, Ireland, Malta] countries). Readability data was grouped into three categories, including (i) high TB-incidence countries (n = 33 information sources), (ii) low TB-incidence countries (n = 39 information sources) and (iii) web information (n = 53). Readability was calculated using Readable software, to obtain four readability scores [(i) Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), (ii) Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), (iii) Gunning Fog Index and (iv) SMOG Index], as well as two text metrics [words/sentence, syllables/word].

RESULTS

Mean readability scores of patient-facing TB antibiotic information for FRE and FKGL, were 47.4 ± 12.6 (sd) (target ≥ 60) and 9.2 ± 2.0 (target ≤ 8.0), respectively. There was no significant difference in readability between low incidence countries and web resources, but there was significantly poorer readability associated with PILs from high incidence countries versus low incidence countries (FRE; p = 0.0056: FKGL; p = 0.0095).

CONCLUSIONS

Readability of TB antibiotic PILs is poor. Improving readability of PILs should be an important objective when preparing patient-facing written materials, thereby improving patient health/treatment literacy.

Online Search Trends Related to Bariatric Surgery and Their Relationship with Utilization in Australia

PURPOSE

There is an abundance of online information related to bariatric surgery. Patients may prefer a specific type of bariatric surgery based on what they read online. The primary aim of this study was to determine online search trends in bariatric surgery over time in Australia and worldwide. The secondary aim was to establish a relationship between public online search activity and the types of bariatric surgery performed in Australia.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

The terms "adjustable gastric band," "sleeve gastrectomy," and "gastric bypass surgery" were submitted for search volume analysis in Australia and worldwide using the Google Trends "Topic" search function. This was compared alongside the numbers of gastric bandings, sleeve gastrectomies, and gastric bypass surgeries performed in Australia over time to determine if there was a relationship between the two.

RESULTS

Search trends for "adjustable gastric band" and "sleeve gastrectomy" in Australia were similar to trends seen worldwide. However, search trends for "gastric bypass surgery" differ between Australia and the rest of the world. It took at least a year for online searches to reflect the higher number of sleeve gastrectomies performed relative to gastric bandings. There was a lag time of over four years before online searches reflected the higher number of gastric bypass surgery performed compared to gastric banding.

CONCLUSION

Search interests in Australia and worldwide were similar for gastric banding and sleeve gastrectomy but different for gastric bypass surgery. Online search activity did not have a significant association with the types of bariatric surgery being performed in Australia.

ChatGPT/GPT-4 (large language models): Opportunities and challenges of perspective in bariatric healthcare professionals

ChatGPT/GPT-4 is a conversational large language model (LLM) based on artificial intelligence (AI). The potential application of LLM as a virtual assistant for bariatric healthcare professionals in education and practice may be promising if relevant and valid issues are actively examined and addressed. In general medical terms, it is possible that AI models like ChatGPT/GPT-4 will be deeply integrated into medical scenarios, improving medical efficiency and quality, and allowing doctors more time to communicate with patients and implement personalized health management. Chatbots based on AI have great potential in bariatric healthcare and may play an important role in predicting and intervening in weight loss and obesity-related complications. However, given its potential limitations, we should carefully consider the medical, legal, ethical, data security, privacy, and liability issues arising from medical errors caused by ChatGPT/GPT-4. This concern also extends to ChatGPT/GPT -4's ability to justify wrong decisions, and there is an urgent need for appropriate guidelines and regulations to ensure the safe and responsible use of ChatGPT/GPT-4.

Large language models and bariatric surgery patient education: a comparative readability analysis of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Bard, and online institutional resources

BACKGROUND

The readability of online bariatric surgery patient education materials (PEMs) often surpasses the recommended 6th grade level. Large language models (LLMs), like ChatGPT and Bard, have the potential to revolutionize PEM delivery. We aimed to evaluate the readability of PEMs produced by U.S. medical institutions compared to LLMs, as well as the ability of LLMs to simplify their responses.

METHODS

Responses to frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to bariatric surgery were gathered from top-ranked health institutions. FAQ responses were also generated from GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Bard. LLMs were then prompted to improve the readability of their initial responses. The readability of institutional responses, initial LLM responses, and simplified LLM responses were graded using validated readability formulas. Accuracy and comprehensiveness of initial and simplified LLM responses were also compared.

RESULTS

Responses to 66 FAQs were included. All institutional and initial LLM responses had poor readability, with average reading levels ranging from 9th grade to college graduate. Simplified responses from LLMs had significantly improved readability, with reading levels ranging from 6th grade to college freshman. When comparing simplified LLM responses, GPT-4 responses demonstrated the highest readability, with reading levels ranging from 6th to 9th grade. Accuracy was similar between initial and simplified responses from all LLMs. Comprehensiveness was similar between initial and simplified responses from GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. However, 34.8% of Bard's simplified responses were graded as less comprehensive compared to initial.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the efficacy of LLMs in enhancing the readability of bariatric surgery PEMs. GPT-4 outperformed other models, generating simplified PEMs from 6th to 9th grade reading levels. Unlike GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, Bard's simplified responses were graded as less comprehensive. We advocate for future studies examining the potential role of LLMs as dynamic and personalized sources of PEMs for diverse patient populations of all literacy levels.

Improving health literacy of antibiotic use in people with cystic fibrosis (CF)-comparison of the readability of patient information leaflets (PILs) from the EU, USA and UK of 23 CF-related antibiotics used in the treatment of CF respiratory infections

Background

Antibiotic adherence is poor amongst people with cystic fibrosis (CF). Low-quality patient information leaflets (PILs), which accompany prescription antibiotics, with poor readability may contribute to poor antibiotic adherence, with the potential for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) development. The aim of this study was to examine the readability of antibiotic PILs used to treat CF lung infections.

Methods

CF-related antibiotics (n = 23; seven classes: aminoglycosides, β-lactams, fluoroquinolones, macrolides/lincosamides, oxazolidinones, tetracyclines, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole) were investigated. Readability of PILs (n = 141; 23 antibiotics) from the EU (n = 40), USA (n = 42) and UK (n = 59) was calculated.

Results

Mean [± standard error of mean (SEM)] values for the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) for EU, USA and UK were 50.0 ± 1.1, 56.2 ± 1.3 and 51.7 ± 1.1, respectively (FRE target ≥60). Mean (± SEM) values for the Flesch Kinkaid Grade Level (FKGL) for the EU, USA and UK were 9.0 ± 0.2, 7.5 ± 0.2 and 9.6 ± 0.2, respectively (FKGL target ≤8). US PILs were significantly shorter (P < 0.0001) in words (mean ± SEM = 1365 ± 52), than either UK or EU PILs, with fewer sentences (P < 0.0001), fewer words per sentence (P < 0.0001) and fewer syllables per word. The mean ( ± SEM) reading time of UK PILs (n = 59) was 12.7 ± 0.55 mins .

Conclusions

Readability of antibiotic PILs is poor. Improving PIL readability may lead to improved health literacy, which may translate to increased antibiotic adherence and AMR avoidance. Authors preparing written materials for the lay/patient CF community are encouraged to employ readability calculators, so that final materials are within recommended readability reference parameters, to support the health (antibiotic) literacy of their readers.

Improving health literacy of antifungal use-Comparison of the readability of antifungal medicines information from Australia, EU, UK, and US of 16 antifungal agents across 5 classes (allylamines, azoles, echinocandins, polyenes, and others)

Adherence to antifungals is poor in high endemic regions where antifungal resistance is high. Poor readability of prescription/over-the-counter (OTC) antifungals may contribute to poor adherence, due to the patient not fully understanding the purpose, importance, and dosage of their antifungal medicine. As there are no reports on the readability of antifungals, this study examined the readability of patient-facing antifungal information. Antifungals (n = 16; five classes [allylamines, azoles, echinocandins, polyenes, and others-flucytosine and griseofulvin]) were selected. Readability of four sources of information, (i) summary of product characteristics, (ii) patient information leaflets (PILs), (iii) OTC patient information, and (iv) patient web-based information, was calculated using Readable software, to obtain readability scores [(i) Flesch Reading Ease [FRE], (ii) Flesch-Kinkaid Grade Level [FKGL], (iii) Gunning Fog Index, and (iv) Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index) and text metrics [word count, sentence count, words/sentence, and syllables/word]. PILs, web-based resources, and OTC patient information had good readability (FRE mean ± sd = 52.8 ± 6.7, 58.6 ± 6.9, and 57.3 ± 7.4, respectively), just falling short of the ≥ 60 target. For FKGL (target ≤ 8.0), PILs, web-based resources, and OTC patient information also had good readability (mean ± sd = 8.5 ± 1.0, 7.2 ± 0.86, and 7.8 ± 0.1, respectively). Improved readability scores observed correlate with reduced words, words/sentence and syllables/word. Improving readability may lead to improved patient health literacy. Healthcare professionals, academics, and publishers preparing written materials regarding antifungals for the lay/patient community are encouraged to employ readability calculators to check the readability of their work, so that the final material is within recommended readability reference parameters, to support the health literacy of their patients/readers.

Readability of patient education materials for bariatric surgery

INTRODUCTION

Bariatric surgery is a successful treatment for obesity, but barriers to surgery exist, including low health literacy. National organizations recommend patient education materials (PEM) not exceed a sixth-grade reading level. Difficult to comprehend PEM can exacerbate barriers to bariatric surgery, especially in the Deep South where high obesity and low literacy rates exist. This study aimed to assess and compare the readability of webpages and electronic medical record (EMR) bariatric surgery PEM from one institution.

METHODS

Readability of online bariatric surgery and standardized perioperative EMR PEM were analyzed and compared. Text readability was assessed by validated instruments: Flesch Reading Ease Formula (FRE), Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog (GF), Coleman-Liau Index (CL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Automated Readability Index (ARI), and Linsear Write Formula (LWF). Mean readability scores were calculated with standard deviations and compared using unpaired t-tests.

RESULTS

32 webpages and seven EMR education documents were analyzed. Webpages were overall "difficult to read" compared to "standard/average" readability EMR materials (mean FRE 50.5 ± 18.3 vs. 67.4 ± 4.2, p = 0.023). All webpages were at or above high school reading level: mean FKGL 11.8 ± 4.4, GF 14.0 ± 3.9, CL 9.5 ± 3.2, SMOG 11.0 ± 3.2, ARI 11.7 ± 5.1, and LWF 14.9 ± 6.6. Webpages with highest reading levels were nutrition information and lowest were patient testimonials. EMR materials were sixth to ninth grade reading level: FKGL 6.2 ± 0.8, GF 9.3 ± 1.4, CL 9.7 ± 0.9, SMOG 7.1 ± 0.8, ARI 6.1 ± 1.0, and LWF 5.9 ± 0.8.

CONCLUSION

Surgeon curated bariatric surgery webpages have advanced reading levels above recommended thresholds compared to standardized PEM from an EMR. This readability gap may unintentionally contribute to barriers to surgery and affect postoperative outcomes. Streamlined efforts are needed to create materials that are easier to read and comply with recommendations.

Assessing the Accuracy of Responses by the Language Model ChatGPT to Questions Regarding Bariatric Surgery

PURPOSE

ChatGPT is a large language model trained on a large dataset covering a broad range of topics, including the medical literature. We aim to examine its accuracy and reproducibility in answering patient questions regarding bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Questions were gathered from nationally regarded professional societies and health institutions as well as Facebook support groups. Board-certified bariatric surgeons graded the accuracy and reproducibility of responses. The grading scale included the following: (1) comprehensive, (2) correct but inadequate, (3) some correct and some incorrect, and (4) completely incorrect. Reproducibility was determined by asking the model each question twice and examining difference in grading category between the two responses.

RESULTS

In total, 151 questions related to bariatric surgery were included. The model provided "comprehensive" responses to 131/151 (86.8%) of questions. When examined by category, the model provided "comprehensive" responses to 93.8% of questions related to "efficacy, eligibility and procedure options"; 93.3% related to "preoperative preparation"; 85.3% related to "recovery, risks, and complications"; 88.2% related to "lifestyle changes"; and 66.7% related to "other". The model provided reproducible answers to 137 (90.7%) of questions.

CONCLUSION

The large language model ChatGPT often provided accurate and reproducible responses to common questions related to bariatric surgery. ChatGPT may serve as a helpful adjunct information resource for patients regarding bariatric surgery in addition to standard of care provided by licensed healthcare professionals. We encourage future studies to examine how to leverage this disruptive technology to improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

A critical appraisal of web-based information on shoulder pain comparing biomedical vs. psychosocial information

BACKGROUND

Websites have become a primary way for patients to access health-related information, which allows patients to not only understand their condition better but also to engage in better decision making with their health care provider. However, this can be a double-edged sword, as information patients access may not be of high quality, easily readable, or could be biased based on website authorship. This study examines the readability and content quality of common websites about shoulder pain, with a specific focus on biomedical vs. psychosocial information.

METHODS

The Flesch reading-ease score (FRES) and Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL) instruments were used to assess website readability. Health on the net code of conduct (HONcode) certification and the DISCERN tool were used to evaluate the reliability and quality of information. Lastly, shoulder-specific content quality and focus was gauged using a Shoulder-specific Website Appraisal Tool (SWAT) created for this study. A systematic search protocol was used to identify popular shoulder injury websites. The websites were identified using 5 search terms (shoulder pain, shoulder muscle pain, shoulder impingement, shoulder rotator cuff pain, and shoulder pain diagnosis) across 5 English-speaking regions (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand) using the Google search engine. The top 10 websites for each term and region combination were included and combined, yielding 41 original websites for appraisal; several (6) websites were omitted as duplicates, behind paywalls, or nontext (video) for a total of 35 websites appraised.

RESULTS

On average, the FRES shoulder pain websites readability was 55.37, which is categorized as "fairly difficult" to read, and a seventh- or eighth-grade reading level based on the FKGL. For trustworthiness and bias, 57% (20 of 35) of the websites were HONcode certified. The quality of health care information using the DISCERN score averaged 50.92%. Examining shoulder-specific content quality, the average SWAT score was 10.54 out of 14 possible points, with only 1 website reporting information on psychosocial aspects of shoulder pain.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that shoulder pain websites present information that is at too high of a reading level for public consumption, has a strong bias toward biomedical causes of shoulder pain, and would benefit from implementation of website screening tools to improve evidence-based content.

Lost in print: difficulty in reading online information pertaining to phenylketonuria

Phenylketonuria (PKU) is the most prevalent inborn error of amino acid metabolism, necessitating patients to strictly restrict dietary phenylalanine. As this can be a confusing and concerning diagnosis, patients and loved ones will likely be drawn to learn more. A critical factor for citizens to harness the health-related digital information is to ensure that it is easy to read. This study assessed the readability of 100 digital articles related to PKU and explored the effect of the source of online information on the readability of these articles. For each article, 5 readability tests were conducted using on-line readability software. From the 100 assessed websites, 34% were commercially sourced. Of the remaining 66 sites, 40% had.org and 17% had.gov extensions. All 5 tests confirm that a large majority of the sample was written at an unacceptable reading level. In fact, over two-thirds of the sample received a readability score within the difficult range for three of the tests, while the remaining two deemed 49% and 45% of the sample as difficult to read, respectively. Commercially sourced websites were deemed to be more difficult to read than the other sites with respect to the two of the five measures. Despite the large amount of PKU information online, most of it may be incomprehensible to the average person and thus miss the mark in helping patients and caregivers manage their condition. Opportunities exist for authors of digital health promotional information to effectively achieve their goal by using comprehensible, easy-to-read language.

Readability of Online Hand Surgery Patient Educational Materials: Evaluating the Trend Since 2008

PURPOSE

Online patient educational materials have historically been written at a higher-than-recommended sixth grade reading level. The objectives of this study were to assess the readability of online hand surgery patient educational materials from the official online patient resource website of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) and to compare changes in the readability of the current ASSH online patient educational materials with those in 2008 and 2015.

METHODS

An internet-based study of all 88 English language patient educational materials on HandCare.org, the official online patient resource website of the ASSH, was performed. The readability of each article was assessed using the Flesch reading ease formula, Flesch-Kincaid grade level, Coleman-Liau index, Gunning-Fog index, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook grade level. To evaluate the trend in the readability of ASSH online hand surgery patient educational materials, the Flesch-Kincaid grade levels of articles published in 2020 were compared with those of data published in 2008 and 2015.

RESULTS

The average Flesch reading ease score of the patient educational materials was 57.6, which is at the high-school reading level. The average reading grade level of patient educational materials ranged from 9.0 to 12.3 depending on the readability metric used. The average Flesch-Kincaid grade level of all the ASSH patient educational materials was 9.8 in 2020, which is significantly better than 10.4 in 2008 but significantly worse than 8.5 in 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

Online hand surgery patient educational materials continue to be written for the general public at a higher-than-recommended reading grade level. There has been no substantial improvement in the readability of online hand surgery patient educational materials since 2008.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Improvements are needed in the readability of online patient educational materials to ensure that patients with all health literacy levels are able to comprehend and benefit from health information.

High tibial osteotomy: A review of the readability and quality of patient information on the internet

Background: High tibial osteotomy (HTO) is a common procedure performed for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA). Patients are increasingly using the internet to research surgical procedures to help aid decision making. Our aim was to assess the readability and quality of information available to patients online relating to HTO.

Methods: A systematic review of three search engines Google®, Bing®, and Yahoo® using the search terms "high tibial osteotomy" and "tibial osteotomy" separately was performed. The first three pages of results for each search engine were analyzed. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Scale (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade level (FKGL) and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook formula (SMOG). Quality was assessed with the DISCERN questionnaire, JAMAbenchmarks and the presence of Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONCode).

Results: Twenty-four webpages were included after duplicates (n=42) and exclusions (n=24).The overall readability was low, with a mean FRES of 53.2 (SD: 9.1), FKGL 10.7 (SD: 1.8),SMOG 10.4 (SD: 1.5). Quality was also low with a mean DISCERN score of 42 (SD: 12.3).None of the webpages fulfilled all of the JAMA benchmarking criteria and only 2/24 (8.3%)webpages possessed HONCode certification.

Conclusion: The overall online information available to patient’s considering HTO is of lowreadability and quality. Improving the quality and readability of patient information online willbenefit informed patient decision making before HTO surgery.

Online Patient Resources for Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: A Readability Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an emerging issue facing the medical community. Government organizations such as the US Food and Drug Administration and specialty groups including the American Society of Plastic Surgeons have published online resources about BIA-ALCL for patients. Given the complexity of the diagnosis, it is important that patients can easily read these resources. In this study, we examined the readability levels of online BIA-ALCL patient resources using multiple verified reading scores.

METHODS

"BIA-ALCL" and "breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma" were entered into 3 Internet search engines. The top 20 results for each were filtered by resource type and intended audience (physician vs patient). Published scientific articles, online database physician resources, and Web sites requiring subscriptions or fees were excluded. We then examined the readability of each with multiple verified reading scores, including the Flesch-Kincaid, Gunning-Fog, Coleman-Liau, Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook, and Automated Readability Index indices. Obtained data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and t test for independent samples.

RESULTS

Fifteen Web sites qualified for further analysis. For all texts, the average readability level was measured between 12 and 13 years of education on each readability index or approximately 18 to 19 years old. The Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease average was 43.16 ±10.9 on a scale of 1 to 100, corresponding to a "difficult" designation. When compared by search criteria (spelled-out vs abbreviated), the results for the abbreviation "BIA-ALCL" had higher education requirements than those with the condition spelled out. However, these differences were not statistically significant. There was also great variation in word and sentence measurements. Twelve of the 15 Web sites contained more than 15% complex words, having more than 3 syllables, with breastcancer.org having the lowest (11%) and plasticsurgery.org the highest (20%).

DISCUSSION

Since the initial announcement in 2014 by the National Cancer Comprehensive Network, the medical community has begun educating ourselves and our patients about BIA-ALCL. Unfortunately, this study suggests that online patient resources on BIA-ALCL may be too complex for most readers, exceeding that of the average US resident (eighth grade) and Medicare beneficiary (fifth grade). Although the goal of learning more about BIA-ALCL and counseling patients appropriately remains paramount, we should continue to improve patient education materials given their vital role in healthcare decision-making.

Readability and Understandability Analysis of Online Materials Related to Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Background:

Patients commonly use online materials as a source of health information. Since poor health literacy has been shown to correlate with negative outcomes, it is recommended that patient-directed materials be written at a sixth-grade reading level. This study evaluates the readability and understandability of commonly accessed online materials pertaining to both endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Methods:

Searches for “endovascular repair abdominal aortic aneurysm” and “open repair abdominal aortic aneurysm” were performed on both Google and Bing, and the top 10 websites from each search engine were identified. Relevant websites (total N = 28, endovascular n = 15, open n = 15, and 2 redundant sites) with patient-directed content were analyzed. Readability was assessed using 9 established methods, and understandability was assessed using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool scoring system.

Results:

The average reading grade level for all sites was 12.8. Endovascular sites averaged a reading grade level of 13.6 with a range from 11.5 to 15.6. Open-repair websites had a grade-level average of 12.1 with a range from 9.9 to 14.1. Readability was found to be inversely related to understandability, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of −0.551 ( P = .003). No website was written at or below the recommended sixth-grade reading level.

Conclusions:

Patient-directed online health information pertaining to open and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm exceeds the recommended sixth-grade reading level. Increasing complexity of health literature correlates with poor understandability. Modifications such as shorter sentences, fewer words with more than 6 letters, and increasing usage of clear visual aids can increase readability and understandability.