Squires Erika S, Ou Hua
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.
Am J Audiol. 2020 Mar 5;29(1):79-87. doi: 10.1044/2019_AJA-19-00063. Epub 2020 Feb 25.
Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore and compare the readability and suitability of patient education materials (PEMs) on topics of age-related hearing loss (ARHL) supplied by electronic health record (EHR) systems and organizations specializing in communication sciences and disorders (CSD). Method PEMs on ARHL were identified through a computerized search of EHR databases and CSD organization websites. Selected PEMs were assessed using three readability indices as well as the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM; Doak et al., 1996), which is a standardized tool to assess the content and design of written educational materials. Ten PEMs from EHR databases and 17 PEMs from CSD organizations were analyzed. Results Overall, 66.7% of PEMs were written above the eighth-grade readability target. PEMs from CSD organizations were significantly more difficult to read compared to those from EHR databases. In total, 85.2% of PEMs were classified as "adequate" using the SAM analysis. No significant SAM score differences were found between PEMs from CSD organizations and those from EHR databases. Common areas of weakness among PEMs were (a) failure to include a summary of key information, (b) reading level, (c) vocabulary (too advanced for the intended audience), and (d) limited subdivision of complex topics. Conclusions The readability and suitability of PEMs on topics of ARHL supplied by EHR providers and CSD organizations are not supportive of the health literacy skills of the average U.S. adult. It is critical to improve the readability, suitability, and comprehensibility of PEMs on ARHL to make information about hearing health care more accessible and usable.
目的 本研究旨在探索并比较电子健康记录（EHR）系统以及专门从事沟通科学与障碍（CSD）的组织所提供的、关于年龄相关性听力损失（ARHL）主题的患者教育材料（PEMs）的可读性和适用性。方法 通过对EHR数据库和CSD组织网站进行计算机化检索，确定关于ARHL的PEMs。使用三种可读性指标以及材料适用性评估（SAM；Doak等人，1996年）对所选PEMs进行评估，SAM是一种评估书面教育材料内容和设计的标准化工具。分析了来自EHR数据库的10份PEMs和来自CSD组织的17份PEMs。结果 总体而言，66.7%的PEMs的编写水平高于八年级的可读性目标。与来自EHR数据库的PEMs相比，来自CSD组织的PEMs阅读难度明显更大。使用SAM分析，总共85.2%的PEMs被归类为“充分”。在来自CSD组织的PEMs和来自EHR数据库的PEMs之间，未发现显著SAM评分差异。PEMs中常见的薄弱环节包括：（a）未包含关键信息总结；（b）阅读水平；（c）词汇（对目标受众来说过于高级）；（d）复杂主题的细分有限。结论 EHR供应商和CSD组织提供的关于ARHL主题的PEMs的可读性和适用性不利于美国普通成年人的健康素养技能。提高关于ARHL的PEMs的可读性、适用性和可理解性，以使听力保健信息更易于获取和使用至关重要。
