ADVERTISEMENT

Assessing the Reading Level of Online Sarcoma Patient Education Materials

The American Journal of Orthopedics. 2015 January;44(1):E1-E10
January 5, 2015 | The American Journal of Orthopedics
Patel SS ; Sheppard ED ; Siegal HJ ; Ponce BA
Author and Disclosure Information

Shaan S. Patel, BA, Evan D. Sheppard, MD, Herrick J. Siegel, MD, and Brent A. Ponce, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: Dr. Siegel wishes to report that he has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Stryker and from Corin. He also reports that he is a paid consultant to Stryker and Corin; has received payment for lectures, including service on speakers bureaus, from Stryker, Corin, and Stanmore; has received payment for development of educational presentations from Stryker and from Corin; and has received money for travel/accommodations/meeting expenses from Stryker. Dr. Ponce wishes to report that he is a paid consultant to Acumed and Tornier; has received payment for lectures, including service on the speakers bureau, from Tornier; has received payment for development of educational presentations on shoulder arthroplasty from Tornier; and his institution has received a grant from Acumed. The other authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Cancer patients rely on patient education materials (PEMs) to gather information regarding their disease. Patients who are better informed about their illness have better health outcomes. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommends that PEMs be written at a sixth- to seventh-grade reading level. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the readability of online PEMs of bone and soft-tissue sarcomas and related conditions.

We identified relevant online PEMs from the following websites: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, academic training centers, sarcoma specialists, Google search hits, Bonetumor.org, Sarcoma Alliance, Sarcoma Foundation of America, and Medscape. We used 10 different readability instruments to evaluate the reading level of each website’s PEMs.

In assessing 72 websites and 774 articles, we found that none of the websites had a mean readability score at or below 7 (seventh grade). Collectively, all websites had a mean readability score of 11.4, and the range of scores was grade level 8.9 to 15.5.

None of the PEMs in this study of bone and soft-tissue sarcomas and related conditions met the NIH recommendation for PEM reading levels. Concerted efforts to improve the reading level of orthopedic oncologic PEMs are necessary.

Conclusion

Because many orthopedic cancer patients rely on the Internet as a source of information, the need for online PEMs to match the reading skills of the patient population who accesses them is vital. However, this study shows that many organizations, academic training centers, and other entities need to update their online PEMs because all PEMs in this study had a mean readability grade level higher than the NIH recommendation. Further research needs to evaluate the effectiveness of other media, such as video, illustrations, and audio, to provide health information to patients. With many guidelines available that provide plans and advice to improve the readability of PEMs, research also must assess the most effective plans and advice in order to allow authors to focus their attention on 1 set of guidelines to improve the readability of their PEMs.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT