Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, USA.
Laryngoscope. 2012 Aug;122(8):1649-54. doi: 10.1002/lary.23309. Epub 2012 Jun 8.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Numerous professional societies, clinical practices, and hospitals provide Internet-based patient education materials (PEMs) to the general public, but not all of this information is written at a reading level appropriate for the average patient. The National Institutes of Health and the US Department of Health and Human Services recommend that PEMs be written at or below the sixth-grade level. Our purpose was to assess the readability of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS)-related PEMs available on the Internet and compare readability levels of PEMs provided by three sources: professional societies, clinical practices, and hospitals.
A descriptive and correlational design was used for this study.
The readability of 31 ESS-related PEMs was assessed with four different readability indices: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook (Gunning FOG). Averages were evaluated against national recommendations and between each source using analysis of variance and t tests.
The majority of PEMs (96.8%) were written above the recommended sixth-grade reading level, based on FKGL (P < .001). Only one article (3.2%) had an FKGL at or below the sixth-grade level. The mean readability values were: FRES 47.1 ± 13.4, FKGL 10.7 ± 2.4, SMOG 13.7 ± 1.6, and Gunning FOG 12.4 ± 2.7.
Current Internet-based PEMs related to ESS, regardless of source type, were written well above the recommended sixth-grade level. Materials from the hospitals/university-affiliated websites had lower readability scores, but were still above recommended levels. Web-based PEMs pertaining to ESS should be written with the average patient in mind.
目的/假设：许多专业协会、临床实践和医院向公众提供基于互联网的患者教育材料（PEM），但并非所有这些信息都是为普通患者编写的，使其能够理解。美国国立卫生研究院和美国卫生与公众服务部建议，PEM 的编写应达到或低于六年级水平。我们的目的是评估互联网上提供的与内镜鼻窦手术（ESS）相关的 PEM 的可读性，并比较由三个来源提供的 PEM 的可读性水平：专业协会、临床实践和医院。
本研究采用描述性和相关性设计。
使用四种不同的可读性指数评估 31 篇 ESS 相关 PEM 的可读性：弗莱什-金凯德年级水平（FKGL）、弗莱什阅读舒适度得分（FRES）、简单测字得分（SMOG）和古登伯格测字频率（Gunning FOG）。平均值根据国家建议进行评估，并使用方差分析和 t 检验在每个来源之间进行评估。
根据 FKGL（P <.001），大多数 PEM（96.8%）的编写水平均高于推荐的六年级阅读水平。只有一篇文章（3.2%）的 FKGL 达到或低于六年级水平。平均可读性值为：FRES 47.1 ± 13.4、FKGL 10.7 ± 2.4、SMOG 13.7 ± 1.6 和 Gunning FOG 12.4 ± 2.7。
目前，与 ESS 相关的基于互联网的 PEM，无论其来源类型如何，其编写水平均远高于推荐的六年级水平。来自医院/大学附属网站的材料可读性得分较低，但仍高于推荐水平。与 ESS 相关的基于网络的 PEM 应考虑到普通患者。
