Suppr超能文献

新加坡初级保健中哮喘患者教育印刷材料质量评价。

Review of the quality of printed patient education materials on asthma available in primary care in Singapore.

机构信息

Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.

SingHealth Polyclinics, SingHealth, Singapore.

出版信息

J Asthma. 2020 Jul;57(7):787-798. doi: 10.1080/02770903.2019.1602876. Epub 2019 May 6.

Abstract

Patient education materials (PEMs) are commonly used for patient education. This study assessed readability, format quality, accuracy, understandability and actionability of printed asthma PEMs available in primary care in Singapore. Primary care in Singapore is provided by island-wide polyclinics and private general practices. We invited the three polyclinic healthcare groups and private general practices the Primary Care Research Network to submit asthma-related PEMs. Readability was assessed using Simple Measure of Gobbledegook (SMOG) and Flesch-Kincaid (FK) score. Format quality was assessed using "Clear-print and large-print golden rules" from UK Association for Accessible Formats (UKAAF). Understandability and actionability were evaluated using Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool - Printed. Three pulmonologists assessed content accuracy. Thirty leaflets were assessed. SMOG and FK estimated 93% (mean 9.3, range 5-14, SD 1.8) and 47% (mean 6.8, range 2.4-9.9, SD 2.0) exceeded the recommended sixth-grade reading level, respectively. About a third (37%) were fully concordant with UKAAF guidelines, with poor format quality contributed by small font size, poor text emphasis methods, and not using left-aligned text. Leaflets generally scored well in both understandability (mean 84%) and actionability (mean 72%). Thirteen leaflets were inaccurate, 92% of which contained at least one inaccuracy judged to have potentially harmful consequences to patients, including wrong emergency advice. While understandability and actionability are adequate, current asthma PEMs are limited by inappropriately high reading levels, poor format quality and inaccuracies. Healthcare professionals need to assess patients' reading abilities and ensure PEMs are accurate and suitable for their patients.

摘要

患者教育材料(PEMs)常用于患者教育。本研究评估了新加坡初级保健中可用的印刷版哮喘 PEM 的可读性、格式质量、准确性、可理解性和可操作性。新加坡的初级保健由全岛的综合诊疗所和私人全科诊所提供。我们邀请了三家综合诊疗所医疗保健集团和私人全科诊所 - 初级保健研究网络提交与哮喘相关的 PEM。使用简单阅读难度测试(SMOG)和 Flesch-Kincaid(FK)评分来评估可读性。格式质量使用英国可访问格式协会(UKAAF)的“清晰印刷和大字印刷黄金规则”进行评估。使用患者教育材料评估工具 - 印刷版来评估可理解性和可操作性。三位肺病专家评估了内容准确性。评估了 30 份传单。SMOG 和 FK 分别估计 93%(平均 9.3,范围 5-14,SD 1.8)和 47%(平均 6.8,范围 2.4-9.9,SD 2.0)超过推荐的六年级阅读水平。大约三分之一(37%)的传单完全符合 UKAAF 指南,格式质量较差,原因是字体较小、文本强调方法不佳以及未使用左对齐文本。传单在可理解性(平均 84%)和可操作性(平均 72%)方面通常得分较高。有 13 份传单不准确,其中 92%包含至少一项被判断对患者有潜在危害后果的错误,包括错误的紧急建议。虽然可理解性和可操作性足够,但当前的哮喘 PEM 受到阅读水平过高、格式质量差和不准确的限制。医疗保健专业人员需要评估患者的阅读能力,并确保 PEM 准确且适合他们的患者。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验