Aggarwal Meha, Yuan Marshall, Hao David
Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, NJ, 08854 United States.
Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, United States.
Interv Pain Med. 2025 Aug 21;4(3):100633. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100633. eCollection 2025 Sep.
As cancer survival improves, chronic cancer-related pain is an increasing clinical concern. Interventional procedures offer targeted, opioid-sparing pain relief, yet the quality and readability of online educational materials about these options remain poorly understood.
To evaluate the availability, quality, and readability of online educational resources on interventional cancer pain management available from National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers.
We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 65 NCI-designated clinical cancer center websites to identify patient-facing content discussing interventional cancer pain procedures. Eligible materials were evaluated for quality using the DISCERN instrument and for readability using seven validated metrics. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Statistical comparisons were performed using t-tests.
Only 20 of 65 cancer center websites (31%) contained relevant educational materials. Sixty qualifying texts were identified: 28 full articles and 32 substantial mentions (≥50 words). The mean DISCERN score was 37 ± 9, indicating poor quality. Articles scored significantly higher than substantial mentions (mean difference 9.4 points, p < 0.001). The ICC for DISCERN scores was 0.872 (p < 0.001), reflecting good inter-rater agreement. Readability analysis revealed an average reading level equivalent to the 11th grade across all metrics, significantly higher than the NIH-recommended 8th-grade level (p < 0.001). Substantial mentions were significantly more difficult to read than articles (p < 0.001).
Online materials on cancer pain interventions are generally scarce, low in quality, and written above nationally recommended reading levels. These findings highlight the need for cancer centers to improve online education materials using plain language and health literacy tools to better support informed decision-making.
随着癌症生存率的提高，慢性癌症相关疼痛日益成为临床关注的问题。介入治疗可提供有针对性的、减少阿片类药物使用的疼痛缓解，但关于这些选择的在线教育材料的质量和可读性仍知之甚少。
评估美国国立癌症研究所（NCI）指定的癌症中心提供的关于介入性癌症疼痛管理的在线教育资源的可用性、质量和可读性。
我们对65个NCI指定的临床癌症中心网站进行了横断面分析，以确定面向患者的讨论介入性癌症疼痛治疗的内容。使用DISCERN工具评估合格材料的质量，并使用七种经过验证的指标评估其可读性。使用组内相关系数（ICC）评估评分者间的可靠性。使用t检验进行统计比较。
65个癌症中心网站中只有20个（31%）包含相关教育材料。共识别出60篇合格文本：28篇完整文章和32条实质性提及（≥50字）。DISCERN平均得分为37±9，表明质量较差。文章得分显著高于实质性提及（平均差异9.4分，p<0.001）。DISCERN评分的ICC为0.872（p<0.001），表明评分者间一致性良好。可读性分析显示，所有指标的平均阅读水平相当于11年级，显著高于美国国立卫生研究院推荐的8年级水平（p<0.001）。实质性提及的内容比文章更难阅读（p<0.001）。
关于癌症疼痛干预措施的在线材料普遍稀缺、质量低下，且写作水平高于国家推荐的阅读水平。这些发现凸显了癌症中心需要使用通俗易懂的语言和健康素养工具来改进在线教育材料，以更好地支持患者做出明智的决策。
