1 / 11

Patient Education: Are We Getting the Message Across?

Patient Education: Are We Getting the Message Across?. Naveen K. Ahuja, MD Ian C. Hoppe, BA Mark S. Granick, MD, FACS Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery New Jersey Medical School – UMDNJ Newark, NJ, USA. Disclosure. The authors have nothing to disclose. Objective.

caesar
Download Presentation

Patient Education: Are We Getting the Message Across?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Patient Education: Are We Getting the Message Across? Naveen K. Ahuja, MD Ian C. Hoppe, BA Mark S. Granick, MD, FACS Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery New Jersey Medical School – UMDNJ Newark, NJ, USA

  2. Disclosure • The authors have nothing to disclose

  3. Objective • The objective of this study was to evaluate readily available on-line patient education information for readability. This information will aid plastic surgeons in appropriately educating their patients.

  4. Background • The National Institutes of Health suggests educational information be at the 4th-6th grade reading level to maximize comprehension. Source: “How to Write Easy-to-Read Health Materials”. Aug 26 2010. Sept 3 2010. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/etr.html

  5. Methods • Text regarding procedure information for patients was extracted from the American Society for Plastic Surgery’s website and from the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery’s website.

  6. Methods • Three objective and validated methods (Flesch-Kincaid, SMOG, and Dale-Chall) were used to assess readability of each procedure’s text.

  7. Methods • Each method uses slightly different methodology • FK uses weighted factors combined with word length and sentence length • SMOG uses a ratio of words with 3 or more syllables to the number of sentences with a validated formula • D-C uses a combination of average sentence length in conjunction with a percentage of words not in a predetermined list of 3,000 commonly used words

  8. Results

  9. Results

  10. Conclusions • Materials on the ASPS website significantly exceeded suggested reading levels • Materials on the ASAPS website significantly exceeded suggested reading levels

  11. Significance • Readily available online plastic surgery educational material is at a level of readability that is substantially higher than the national average; additionally, these materials are at a higher level than recommended by the NIH.

More Related