Readability and Comprehensibility of Patient Education Material in Hand-Related Web Sites

Journal of Hand Surgery

Volumn 34, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 1308-1315

  Wang, Steve W ^a   Capo, John T ^a   Orillaza, Nathaniel ^a  

^a RUTGERS NEW JERSEY MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Hand; information; Internet; patient; readability; wrist

Indexed keywords

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS; AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR SURGERY OF THE HAND; ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DALE CHALL GRADE LEVEL ASSESSOR; FLESCH KINCAID PROGRAM; HAND INJURY; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; INTERNET; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT INFORMATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; READING; UNITED STATES;

COMPREHENSION; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; HAND; HUMANS; INTERNET; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASES; ORTHOPEDIC EQUIPMENT; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; UNITED STATES; WRIST;

EID: 68849109909     PISSN: 03635023     EISSN: 15316564     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.04.008     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Diaz J.A., Griffith R.A., Ng J.J., Reinert S.E., Friedmann P.D., and Moulton A.W. Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 17 (2002) 180-185
2. Fox S. Most internet users start at a search engine when looking for health information online. Data from Pew Internet and American Life Project, Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/132/press_release.asp Accessed July 31, 2008.
3. Fox S. Eight in ten internet users have looked for health information online, with increased interest in diet, fitness, drugs, health insurance, experimental treatments, and particular doctors and hospitals. Data from Pew Internet and American Life Project, Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/156/report_display.asp Accessed July 31, 2008.
4. Beall III M.S., Beall Jr. M.S., Greenfield M.L., and Biermann J.S. Patient Internet use in a community outpatient orthopaedic practice. Iowa Orthop J 22 (2002) 103-107
5. Berland G.K., Elliott M.N., Morales L.S., Algazy J.I., Kravitz R.L., Broder M.S., et al. Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 285 (2001) 2612-2621
6. Brooks B.A. Using the Internet for patient education. Orthop Nurs 20 (2001) 69-77
7. Krempec J., Hall J., and Biermann J.S. Internet use by patients in orthopaedic surgery. Iowa Orthop J 23 (2003) 80-82
8. Wolf J.M., Ritter M., Weiss A.P., and Akelman E. Access and use of the internet in a hand surgery population. Hand Surg 9 (2004) 29-33
9. Beredjiklian P.K., Bozentka D.J., Steinberg D.R., and Bernstein J. Evaluating the source and content of orthopaedic information on the Internet: the case of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg 82A (2000) 1540-1543
10. National Institutes of Health. How to write easy to read health materials. Bethesda, MD (2007). http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/etr.html Accessed December 4, 2008.
11. Weiss B.D. Health literacy: a manual for clinicians. Chicago, IL (2003). http://www.ihconline.org/toolkits/HealthLiteracy/AMAHealthLiteracyManualClinicians.pdf Accessed July 31, 2008.
12. Centers for Disease Control. Scientific and technical information: simply put. Atlanta, GA (1999). http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/simpput.pdf Accessed July 31, 2008.
13. Doak C.C., Doak L.G., and Root J.H. Teaching patients with low literacy skills. 2nd ed. (1996), JB Lippincott, Philadelphia 1-9 44-49, 73-89
14. Friedman D.B., and Hoffman-Goetz L. A systematic review of readability and comprehension instruments used for print and web-based cancer information. Health Educ Behav 33 (2006) 352-373
15. Hochhauser M. Flesch-Kincaid in Microsoft Word is flawed. CA Cancer J Clin. http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/eletters/52/3/130 Accessed July 31, 2008.
16. Chall J. Readability: an appraisal of research and application (1958), Ohio State University Press, Columbus, OH 69-77, 87-91
17. Klare G.R. The measurement of readability (1963), Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA 1, 56-61, 111-167
18. DuBay W.H. The principles of readability. Data from Impact Information, Costa Mesa. http://www.impact-information.com/impactinfo/readability02.pdf Accessed July 31, 2008.
19. Paasche-Orlow M.K., Taylor H.A., and Brancati F.L. Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 721-726
20. Barrio Cantalejo I., and Simon L.P. [Measurement of the legibility of written texts: correlation between the Flesch manual method and computer methods]. Aten Primaria 31 (2003) 104-108
21. El-Ibiary S.Y., and Youmans S.L. Health literacy and contraception: a readability evaluation of contraceptive instructions for condoms, spermicides and emergency contraception in the USA. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 12 (2007) 58-62
22. Brown-Chidsey R.D.L., and Maya C. Sources of variance in curriculum-based measures of silent reading. Psychology in the Schools 40 (2003) 363-377
23. Eisen S.V., Normand S.L., Belanger A.J., Spiro III A., and Esch D. The Revised Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-R): reliability and validity. Med Care 42 (2004) 1230-1241
24. Badarudeen S., and Sabharwal S. Readability of patient education materials from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America web sites. J Bone Joint Surg 90A (2008) 199-204
25. Chall J.S., and Dale E. Readability revisited, the new Dale-Chall readability formula (1995), Brookline Books, Cambridge, MA 144
26. Greenberg E., and Jin Y. 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Data from Institute of Education Sciences, Washington, DC. http://nces.ed.gov/naal/index.asp Accessed July 31, 2008.
27. Kirsch I., Jungeblut A., Jenkins L., and Kolstad A. Adult literacy in America: a first look at the findings of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Data from US Department of Education. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs93/93275.pdf Accessed July 31, 2008.
28. Kutner M., Greenberg E., Jin Y., and Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of America's Adults: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Data from Institute of Education Sciences, Washington, DC. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=93275 Accessed July 31, 2008.
29. Baker D.W., Parker R.M., Williams M.V., Clark W.S., and Nurss J. The relationship of patient reading ability to self-reported health and use of health services. Am J Public Health 87 (1997) 1027-1030
30. Weiss B.D., Hart G., McGee D.L., and D'Estelle S. Health status of illiterate adults: relation between literacy and health status among persons with low literacy skills. J Am Board Fam Pract 5 (1992) 257-264
31. Williams M.V., Baker D.W., Honig E.G., Lee T.M., and Nowlan A. Inadequate literacy is a barrier to asthma knowledge and self-care. Chest 114 (1998) 1008-1015
32. Williams M.V., Baker D.W., Parker R.M., and Nurss J.R. Relationship of functional health literacy to patients' knowledge of their chronic disease: a study of patients with hypertension and diabetes. Arch Intern Med 158 (1998) 166-172
33. Jackson R.H., Davis T.C., Bairnsfather L.E., George R.B., Crouch M.A., and Gault H. Patient reading ability: an overlooked problem in health care. South Med J 84 (1991) 1172-1175
34. Kutner M., Greenberg E., and Baer J. National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL): a first look at the literacy of America's adults in the 21st century. Data from National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=93275 Accessed July 31, 2008.
35. Davis T.C., Wolf M.S., Bass P.F., Middlebrooks M., Kennen E., Baker D.W., et al. Low literacy impairs comprehension of prescription drug warning labels. J Gen Intern Med 21 (2006) 847-851
36. McGee J. Writing and designing print materials for beneficiaries: a guide for state Medicaid and state operations (1999), Health Care Financing Administration, Center for Medicaid and State Operations, Baltimore, MD HCFA Publication 10145,:316
37. Nielsen-Bohlman L.P.A. Health literacy: prescription to end confusion (2004), National Academies Press, Washington, DC 1-18, 59-62
38. Washington State Department of Health: Health Education Resource Exchange. Guidelines for developing easy-to-read health education materials. http://www3.doh.wa.gov/here/howto/images/easy2.html Accessed May 27, 2009.
39. Smith A. Internet activities. Data from Pew Internet and American Life Project, Washington, DC. http://pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_Jan_07_2009.htm Accessed March 12, 2009.
40. Jones S., and Fox S. Generations online in 2009. Data from Pew Internet and American Life Project, Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Generations_2009.pdf Accessed March 12, 2009.
41. Rainie L., Packel D., Fox S., Horrigan J., Lenhart A., Spooner T., et al. More online, doing more: 16 million newcomers gain Internet access in the last half of 2000 as women, minorities, and families with modest incomes continue to surge online. Data from Pew Internet and American Life Project, Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Changing_Population.pdf Accessed July 31, 2008.
42. Mailloux S.L., Johnson M.E., Fisher D.G., and Pettibone T.J. How reliable is computerized assessment of readability?. Comput Nurs 13 (1995) 221-225
43. D'Alessandro D.M., Kingsley P., and Johnson-West J. The readability of pediatric patient education materials on the World Wide Web. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 155 (2001) 807-812
44. Sabharwal S., Badarudeen S., and Unes Kunju S. Readability of online patient education materials from the AAOS web site. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466 (2008) 1245-1250