Assessment of Online Patient Education Materials From Major Ophthalmologic Associations

Huang, Grace C.; Fang, Christina H.; Agarwal, Nitin; Bhagat, Neelakshi; Eloy, Jean Anderson; Langer, Paul D.

doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.6104

Cited by 98 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For other specialties such as facial plastic surgery, 16,21 otolaryngology, 18,20 and ophthalmology, 17 PEMs were found to be written above a 10th-grade reading level. Awal and Mills 19 evaluated cosmetic facial surgery websites in the United Kingdom, and their sample included 27 orthognathic surgery websites.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,15 Unfortunately, many surgical specialties have found that their online PEMs often do not satisfy AMA and NIH recommendations. [16][17][18][19][20][21] Patients seeking orthognathic surgery rely on the internet to obtain additional information, support, and reassurance. 22 Although functional and esthetic improvements are major components of patient satisfaction, 23 communication between patient and provider and overall patient expectations also have been shown to influence levels of satisfaction.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Online Patient Education Materials for Orthognathic Surgery Fail to Meet Readability and Quality Standards

Lee

Berg

Jazayeri

et al. 2019

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Patient Education Materials for Orthognathic Surgery Fail to Meet Readability and Quality Standards

Lee

Berg

Jazayeri

et al. 2019

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Prior studies have shown that effective medical education requires that the educational content to be presented in the vernacular and in a simple manner . According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the average American reads between a seventh‐grade and eighth‐grade level.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Double‐blinded randomized controlled trial to evaluate a multimedia surgical care tour in improving patient satisfaction and knowledge after functional endoscopic sinus surgery

Zeiger

McKee

et al. 2018

Int Forum Allergy Rhinol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Current delivery of patient education is done during the clinic visit, where physicians or clinic staff have limited time for each patient. One potential solution is to provide a multimedia surgical care tour delivered to patients throughout the perioperative period. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of this surgical care tour in enhancing patient knowledge and satisfaction after functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). Methods A total of 121 patients were enrolled and a double‐blinded randomized controlled trial was initiated. Patients in the experimental group received 4 educational videos and automated reminders to take medications. The control group received a sham platform. Patients were randomized by MEDUMO software, and physicians, clinic staff, and patients were blinded. Patient satisfaction was measured by Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Surgical Care Survey Version 2.0. Patient knowledge was graded by the blinded surgeon and clinic staff. Fischer's exact test and 2‐tailed independent samples Student t test were used to compare the satisfaction and patient knowledge outcomes, respectively. Results Patients in the experimental group were more likely to answer “Yes, definitely” to “Did these pictures drawings models or videos help you better understand your condition and its treatment?” (95.7% vs 74.1%, p = 0.011). The mean ± standard deviation clinic staff assessment of patient knowledge was 3.04 ± 1.05 in the control group and 3.68 ± 1.41 in the experimental group (p = 0.043). Conclusion A multimedia surgical care tour was developed and has promising effects on patient satisfaction and knowledge after FESS.

show abstract

“…These metrics are also used extensively in the health care domain to measure the readability of patient handouts [18,28-30], Web-based health information for patients [19,31,32], medication inserts [33,34], informed consent forms [20,35,36], clinical trial information [37], and Wikipedia medical entries [38,39]. FKGL, in particular, is used in more than half of readability studies compared in one review [40].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability Formulas and User Perceptions of Electronic Health Records Difficulty: A Corpus Study

Zheng¹,

Yu²

2017

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundElectronic health records (EHRs) are a rich resource for developing applications to engage patients and foster patient activation, thus holding a strong potential to enhance patient-centered care. Studies have shown that providing patients with access to their own EHR notes may improve the understanding of their own clinical conditions and treatments, leading to improved health care outcomes. However, the highly technical language in EHR notes impedes patients’ comprehension. Numerous studies have evaluated the difficulty of health-related text using readability formulas such as Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning-Fog Index (GFI). They conclude that the materials are often written at a grade level higher than common recommendations.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to explore the relationship between the aforementioned readability formulas and the laypeople’s perceived difficulty on 2 genres of text: general health information and EHR notes. We also validated the formulas’ appropriateness and generalizability on predicting difficulty levels of highly complex technical documents.MethodsWe collected 140 Wikipedia articles on diabetes and 242 EHR notes with diabetes International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code. We recruited 15 Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) users to rate difficulty levels of the documents. Correlations between laypeople’s perceived difficulty levels and readability formula scores were measured, and their difference was tested. We also compared word usage and the impact of medical concepts of the 2 genres of text.ResultsThe distributions of both readability formulas’ scores (P<.001) and laypeople’s perceptions (P=.002) on the 2 genres were different. Correlations of readability predictions and laypeople’s perceptions were weak. Furthermore, despite being graded at similar levels, documents of different genres were still perceived with different difficulty (P<.001). Word usage in the 2 related genres still differed significantly (P<.001).ConclusionsOur findings suggested that the readability formulas’ predictions did not align with perceived difficulty in either text genre. The widely used readability formulas were highly correlated with each other but did not show adequate correlation with readers’ perceived difficulty. Therefore, they were not appropriate to assess the readability of EHR notes.

show abstract

Assessment of Online Patient Education Materials From Major Ophthalmologic Associations

Cited by 98 publications

References 24 publications

Online Patient Education Materials for Orthognathic Surgery Fail to Meet Readability and Quality Standards

Online Patient Education Materials for Orthognathic Surgery Fail to Meet Readability and Quality Standards

Double‐blinded randomized controlled trial to evaluate a multimedia surgical care tour in improving patient satisfaction and knowledge after functional endoscopic sinus surgery

Readability Formulas and User Perceptions of Electronic Health Records Difficulty: A Corpus Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About