Quality and Readability of Online Information on In-Office Vocal Fold Injections

Grace S. Yi, A. Hu
{"title":"Quality and Readability of Online Information on In-Office Vocal Fold Injections","authors":"Grace S. Yi, A. Hu","doi":"10.1177/0003489419887406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Vocal fold injection augmentations are increasingly being performed in the office setting on awake patients, as opposed to the operating room. These procedures thus require patient cooperation and education. As the Internet is a widely-used resource for patients, our aim was to assess the quality and readability of online resources on in-office awake vocal fold injections. Methods: An online Google search using the terms “office vocal fold injection medialization” and “awake vocal fold injection” was conducted. The first 50 English-language websites were categorized into professional- and patient-targeted, and major and minor sources. They were analyzed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) test, and DISCERN quality score. Results: Fifty websites were evaluated, and the overall DISCERN score was 2.60 ± 1.01, the mean FRES was 32.16 ± 19.10, and the mean FKGL was 13.76 ± 4.12. Between the 25 professional-targeted and 25 patient-targeted websites, professional-targeted sites had significantly higher DISCERN (P < .05) and FKGL (P < .05) scores, and lower FRES (P < .05) scores. Between the 30 major and 20 minor websites, major websites had significantly lower FRES (P < .05) and higher FKGL (P < .05) scores, and there was a trend toward significance for higher DISCERN scores (P = .052). Conclusions: Our study shows that half of the top Google results for our topic were not written for patient education, but rather for health care professionals. The reading level of this information exceeds the recommended grade level for patient education materials, and may be less comprehensible than intended. While patient-targeted materials are easier to read than professional-targeted sites, they are of lower quality. The quality of the available online information on this topic is suboptimal for both patients and health care providers. This research highlights the need for more appropriate patient education materials given low health literacy rates.","PeriodicalId":8361,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology","volume":"426 1","pages":"294 - 300"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489419887406","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Objectives: Vocal fold injection augmentations are increasingly being performed in the office setting on awake patients, as opposed to the operating room. These procedures thus require patient cooperation and education. As the Internet is a widely-used resource for patients, our aim was to assess the quality and readability of online resources on in-office awake vocal fold injections. Methods: An online Google search using the terms “office vocal fold injection medialization” and “awake vocal fold injection” was conducted. The first 50 English-language websites were categorized into professional- and patient-targeted, and major and minor sources. They were analyzed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) test, and DISCERN quality score. Results: Fifty websites were evaluated, and the overall DISCERN score was 2.60 ± 1.01, the mean FRES was 32.16 ± 19.10, and the mean FKGL was 13.76 ± 4.12. Between the 25 professional-targeted and 25 patient-targeted websites, professional-targeted sites had significantly higher DISCERN (P < .05) and FKGL (P < .05) scores, and lower FRES (P < .05) scores. Between the 30 major and 20 minor websites, major websites had significantly lower FRES (P < .05) and higher FKGL (P < .05) scores, and there was a trend toward significance for higher DISCERN scores (P = .052). Conclusions: Our study shows that half of the top Google results for our topic were not written for patient education, but rather for health care professionals. The reading level of this information exceeds the recommended grade level for patient education materials, and may be less comprehensible than intended. While patient-targeted materials are easier to read than professional-targeted sites, they are of lower quality. The quality of the available online information on this topic is suboptimal for both patients and health care providers. This research highlights the need for more appropriate patient education materials given low health literacy rates.
办公室内声带注射在线信息的质量和可读性
目的:与手术室相比,声带注射增强术越来越多地在清醒的病人身上进行。因此,这些程序需要耐心的合作和教育。由于互联网是患者广泛使用的资源,我们的目的是评估在线资源在办公室清醒声带注射的质量和可读性。方法:在网上谷歌检索“办公室声带注射介质化”和“清醒声带注射”。首批50个英文网站被分为专业和患者目标、主要和次要来源。采用Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES)、Flesch- kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) test和DISCERN quality Score进行分析。结果:共评估50个网站,总分为2.60±1.01分,平均FRES为32.16±19.10分,平均FKGL为13.76±4.12分。在25个专业网站和25个患者网站中,专业网站的DISCERN评分(P < 0.05)和FKGL评分(P < 0.05)显著高于专业网站,FRES评分显著低于专业网站(P < 0.05)。在30个主要网站和20个次要网站中,主要网站的FRES得分显著低于其他网站(P < 0.05), FKGL得分显著高于其他网站(P < 0.05),而DISCERN得分有显著高于其他网站的趋势(P = 0.052)。结论:我们的研究表明,我们主题的谷歌结果中有一半不是为患者教育而写的,而是为卫生保健专业人员而写的。这些信息的阅读水平超过了患者教育材料的推荐年级水平,可能比预期的更难以理解。虽然针对患者的材料比针对专业人士的网站更容易阅读,但它们的质量较低。对于患者和医疗保健提供者而言,关于该主题的可用在线信息的质量都不是最佳的。这项研究强调,鉴于卫生识字率低,需要更适当的患者教育材料。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信