From the VCU School of Medicine.
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, VCU Health System, Richmond, VA.
Ann Plast Surg. 2021 Jun 1;86(6):610-614. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002575.
Women undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction face many complex choices. A myriad of online patient education materials exist to assist in decision making. Understanding of these materials, termed health literacy, affects surgical decision making and outcomes. The National Institutes of Health recommends writing patient education materials at a sixth- to seventh-grade reading level. The primary goal of this study was to assess readability of online breast reconstruction materials.
Resources were collected from every academic hospital with a plastic surgery residency program, 97 in total. These data were compared with the top nonacademic Web sites ranked by search engine results, 14 in total. Materials were analyzed using 3 validated readability assessment scales: Coleman-Liau Index, SMOG (Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook) Readability Formula, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. Average readability was analyzed, and results were compared using a 1-way analysis of variance to assess for significance between the different tools and a 2-sided t test to assess for significance between academic and nonacademic readability results.
The mean readability scores across the academic programs were a Coleman-Liau Index of 13.38 (standard Deviation [SD] 2.81, 13th to 14th grade), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 13.04 (SD = 3.9, 13th grade), and SMOG Readability of 13.64 (SD = 2.99, 13th to 14th grade). For the 14 nonacademic sites, results showed a Coleman-Liau Index of 11.93 (SD = 1.14, 12th grade), Flesch-Kincaid of 11.82 (SD = 2.33, 11th to 12th grade), and SMOG Readability of 10.91 (SD = 1.79, 11th grade). One-way analysis of variance demonstrated no significant differences in mean readability scores across the 3 readability tools used (academic F = 2.7804, P = 0.06; nonacademic F = 1.14, P = 0.33). Two-tailed t test results demonstrated that there was statistical significance between readability of the academic in comparison with nonacademic search engine results (t = 2.04, P = 0.04).
Average readability across all Web sites were much higher than the recommended reading level, at a 13th to 14th grade reading level for academic institutions, and an 11th to 12th grade for nonacademic Web sites. Plastic surgeons may contribute to improving patient understanding and perioperative outcomes through revising patient education materials.
接受乳腺癌根治术后乳房重建的女性面临着许多复杂的选择。存在大量的在线患者教育材料来帮助做出决策。对这些材料的理解,称为健康素养,会影响手术决策和结果。美国国立卫生研究院建议将患者教育材料的写作水平设定在六年级至七年级的阅读水平。本研究的主要目的是评估在线乳房重建材料的可读性。
从每一所拥有整形外科住院医师培训计划的学术医院收集资源,总共 97 家。这些数据与搜索引擎结果排名前 14 位的非学术网站进行了比较。使用 3 种经过验证的可读性评估量表:Coleman-Liau 指数、SMOG(简化的胡言乱语可读性公式)和 Flesch-Kincaid 等级。分析平均可读性,使用单向方差分析比较不同工具之间的结果,使用双侧 t 检验比较学术和非学术可读性结果之间的差异。
学术项目的平均可读性评分分别为 Coleman-Liau 指数 13.38(标准差 [SD] 2.81,13 至 14 年级)、Flesch-Kincaid 等级 13.04(SD = 3.9,13 年级)和 SMOG 可读性 13.64(SD = 2.99,13 至 14 年级)。对于 14 个非学术网站,结果显示 Coleman-Liau 指数为 11.93(SD = 1.14,12 年级)、Flesch-Kincaid 为 11.82(SD = 2.33,11 至 12 年级)和 SMOG 可读性为 10.91(SD = 1.79,11 年级)。单向方差分析显示,使用的 3 种可读性工具的平均可读性评分无显著差异(学术 F = 2.7804,P = 0.06;非学术 F = 1.14,P = 0.33)。双尾 t 检验结果表明,学术机构与非学术搜索引擎结果的可读性存在统计学意义(t = 2.04,P = 0.04)。
所有网站的平均可读性都远高于推荐的阅读水平,学术机构为 13 至 14 年级,非学术网站为 11 至 12 年级。整形外科医生可以通过修改患者教育材料来提高患者的理解能力和围手术期结局。