Pass Jonathan H, Patel Amani H, Stuart Sam, Barnacle Alex M, Patel Premal A
Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, Great Ormond Street, London, WC1N 3JH, UK.
University College London Medical School, University College London, London, UK.
Pediatr Radiol. 2018 May;48(5):708-714. doi: 10.1007/s00247-018-4074-3. Epub 2018 Feb 2.
Patients often use the internet as a source of information about their condition and treatments. However, this information is unregulated and varies in quality.
To evaluate the readability and quality of online information for pediatric and adult patients and caregivers regarding sclerotherapy for venous malformations.
"Venous malformation sclerotherapy" was entered into Google, and results were reviewed until 20 sites that satisfied predefined inclusion criteria were identified. Scientific and non-patient-focused web pages were excluded. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score and American Medical Association reading difficulty recommendations and quality was assessed using Journal of the American Medical Association standards and assessing if the site displayed HONcode (Health on the Net Code) certification. Assessment of the breadth of relevant information was made using a predefined checklist.
Forty-nine search engine results were reviewed before 20 sites were identified for analysis. Average Flesch Reading Ease Score was 44 (range: 24.2-70.1), representing a "fairly difficult" reading level. None of the sites had a Flesch Reading Ease Score meeting the American Medical Association recommendation of 80-90. Only one site met all four Journal of the American Medical Association quality criteria (average: 2.1). None of the sites displayed a HONcode seal. The information most frequently found was: sclerotherapy is performed by radiologists, multiple treatments may be needed and surgery is an alternative treatment.
Online information regarding sclerotherapy for venous malformations is heterogeneous in quality and breadth of information, and does not meet readability recommendations for patient information. Radiologists should be aware of and account for this when meeting patients.
患者常常将互联网作为有关自身病情及治疗信息的来源。然而，此类信息缺乏规范，质量参差不齐。
评估面向儿科及成年患者及其护理人员的关于静脉畸形硬化治疗的在线信息的可读性及质量。
在谷歌中输入“静脉畸形硬化治疗”，浏览搜索结果，直至确定20个符合预定义纳入标准的网站。排除科学类及非以患者为中心的网页。使用弗莱什易读性分数及美国医学协会阅读难度建议评估可读性，使用美国医学协会标准并评估网站是否显示HONcode（健康网络代码）认证来评估质量。使用预定义清单评估相关信息的广度。
在确定20个网站进行分析之前，共浏览了49个搜索引擎结果。平均弗莱什易读性分数为44（范围：24.2 - 70.1），代表“相当困难”的阅读水平。没有一个网站的弗莱什易读性分数符合美国医学协会80 - 90的建议。只有一个网站符合美国医学协会所有四项质量标准（平均：2.1）。没有一个网站显示HONcode标志。最常出现的信息是：硬化治疗由放射科医生进行，可能需要多次治疗，手术是一种替代治疗方法。
关于静脉畸形硬化治疗的在线信息在质量和信息广度上存在差异，且不符合患者信息的可读性建议。放射科医生在接诊患者时应意识到并考虑到这一点。
