Top

Insights into Imaging

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Care | Original Article

Readability of patient education materials related to radiation safety: What are the implications for patient-centred radiology care?

Authors: Francis T. Delaney, Tiarnán Ó. Doinn, James M. Broderick, Emma Stanley

Published in: Insights into Imaging | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Increasing numbers of patients and carers rely on online resources for healthcare information. Radiation safety can be misunderstood by patients and clinicians and lead to patient anxiety. We aimed to assess the readability of online patient educational materials (PEMs) related to radiation safety.

Methods

A total of 84 articles pertaining to radiation safety from 14 well-known online resources were identified. PEMs were then analysed using Readability Studio Professional Edition Version 2019. Readability was assessed using eight different instruments: the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level, Raygor Estimate, SMOG, Coleman–Liau, Fry, FORCAST, Gunning Fog, and Flesch Reading Ease Score formula. The mean reading grade level (RGL) of each article was compared to the 6th and 8th grade reading level using 1-sample t-tests.

Results

The cumulative mean RGL for all 84 articles was 13.3 (range = 8.6–17.4), and none were written at or below the 6th or 8th grade level. The cumulative mean RGL exceeded the 6th grade reading level by an average of 7.3 levels (95% CI, 6.8–7.8; p < 0.001) and the 8th grade level by an average of 5.3 grade levels (95% CI, 4.8–5.8; p < 0.001). The mean Flesch Reading Ease Score was 39/100 (‘difficult’).

Conclusion

Currently available online PEMs related to radiation safety are still written at higher than recommended reading levels. Radiation safety is a topic in which the specialist training of radiologists is crucial in providing guidance to patients. Addressing the readability of online PEMs can improve radiology-patient communication and support the shift to a patient-centred model of practice.

Available only for authorised users

International Telecommunications Union (2020) Measuring digital development—facts and figures 2020. ITU Publications, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/FactsFigures2020.pdf

Bach RL, Wenz A (2020) Studying health-related internet and mobile device use using web logs and smartphone records. PLoS One 15:e0234663. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234663CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Prestin A, Vieux SN, Chou WYS (2015) Is online health activity alive and well or flatlining? Findings from 10 years of the Health Information National Trends Survey. J Health Commun 20:790–798. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2015.1018590CrossRefPubMed

Brooks L (2016) RadiologyInfo.org draws record number of visits, launches new section. RSNA Press Release. RSNA Media Relations, February 2016. https://press.rsna.org/timssnet/media/pressreleases/14_pr_target.cfm?ID=1878

Rice RE (2006) Influences, usage, and outcomes of Internet health information searching: multivariate results from the Pew surveys. Int J Med Inform 751:8–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.07.032CrossRef

Hirsch M, Aggarwal S, Barker C, Davis CJ, Duffy JMN (2017) Googling endometriosis: a systematic review of information available on the internet. Am J Obstet Gynecol 216:451–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2016.11.1007CrossRefPubMed

Weiss BD (2007) Health literacy and patient safety: help patients understand. Manual for Clinicians, 2nd edn. American Medical Association Foundation and American Medical Association

US Department of Health and Human Services—Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010) Simply put—a guide for creating easy-to-understand materials. July 2010. 3rd edn. CDC, Atlanta, Georgia. https://www.cdc.gov/healthliteracy/pdf/Simply_Put.pdf

Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C (2006) The health literacy of america’s adults: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006–483). National Center for Education Statistics

10.

OECD/Statistics Canada (2011) Literacy for life: further results from the adult literacy and life skills survey. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264091269-enCrossRef

11.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (2010) National action plan to improve health literacy. Washington, DC

12.

Berkman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE et al (2011) Health literacy interventions and outcomes: an updated systematic review. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 199. AHRQ Publication Number 11-E006. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville (MD). http://www.ahrq.gov/downloads/pub/evidence/pdf/literacy/literacyup.pdf

13.

Department of Health and Human Services (1982) Pretesting in health communications. National Institutes of Health, DHHS Publication

14.

Brega AG, Barnard J, Mabachi NM, et al (2015) AHRQ health literacy universal precautions toolkit. 2nd edn. AHRQ Publication No. 15-0023-EF. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. January 2015. https://www.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/publications/files/healthlittoolkit2_3.pdf. Accessed 2021

15.

National Institutes of Health. Clear & Simple. US Department of Health and Human Services 2018. https://www.nih.gov/institutes-nih/nih-office-director/office-communications-public-liaison/clear-communication/clear-simple

16.

Agarwal N, Hansberry DR, Sabourin V, Tomei KL, Prestigiacomo CJ (2013) A comparative analysis of the quality of patient education material from medical specialities. JAMA Intern Med 173:1257–1259CrossRef

17.

National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Report No. 184—Medical Radiation Exposure of Patients in the United States (2019). ISBN: 9781944888169

18.

Krille L, Hammer GP, Merzenich H, Zeeb H (2010) Systematic review on physician’s knowledge about radiation doses and radiations risks of computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 76:36–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.08.025CrossRefPubMed

19.

Hay JL, Gold GS, Baser RE, Hricak D, Dauer LT (2016) Prevalence and correlates of worry about the health harms of medical imaging radiation in the general population. J Prim Care Community Health 7:219–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/2150131916648917CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Hansberry DR, Ramchand T, Patel S et al (2014) Are we failing to communicate? Internet-based patient education materials and radiation safety. Eur J Radiol 83:1698–1702CrossRef

21.

Yi PH, Yi MM, Nguyen JC (2018) Readability of online information related to paediatric radiation safety from societal websites. AJR Am J Roentgenol 211:1128–1134. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.19299CrossRefPubMed

22.

Oleander Software Ltd. (2012). Readability studio. https://www.oleandersolutions.com/ReadabilityStudioFeatures.html. Accessed 10 April 2021

23.

Friedman DB, Hoffman-Goetz L (2006) A systematic review of readability and comprehension instruments used for print and web-based cancer information. Health Educ Behav 33:352–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198105277329CrossRefPubMed

24.

Rooney MK, Santiago G, Perni S et al (2021) Readability of patient education materials from high-impact medical journals: a 20-year analysis. J Patient Exp 8:2374373521998847. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374373521998847CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Epstein RM, Street RL Jr (2011) The values and value of patient-centred care. Ann Fam Med 9:100–103. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1239CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Hofstede SN, van Bodegom-Vos L, Wentink MM et al (2014) Most important factors for the implementation of shared decision making in sciatica care: ranking among professionals and patients. PLoS One 9:e94176. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094176CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Kemp JL, Mahoney MC, Mathews VP, Wintermark M, Yee J, Brown SD (2017) Patient-centred radiology: where are we, where do we want to be, and how do we get there? Radiology 285:601–608. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017162056CrossRefPubMed

28.

Bange M, Huh E, Novin SA, Hui FK, Yi PH (2019) Readability of patient education materials from RadiologyInfo.org: has there been progress over the past 5 years? Am J Roentgenol 213:875–879. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.21047CrossRef

29.

O Doinn T, Broderick JM, Abdelhalim MM, Quinlan JF (2020) Readability of patient educational material in hip and knee arthroplasty: has a decade made a difference? J Arthroplasty 35:3076–3083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.05.076CrossRef

30.

Rigsby CK, Krishnaraj A (2020) Progress in improving readability of RadiologyInfo.org. AJR Am J Roentgenol 214:78. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.19.22362CrossRef

31.

Moore QT (2014) Medical radiation dose perception and its effects on public health. Radiol Technol 85:247–255PubMed

32.

Redberg RF, Smith-Bindman R (2014) We are giving ourselves cancer. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/opinion/we-are-giving-ourselves-cancer.html. Accessed 2020

33.

Sweetman SJ, Bernard J (2020) Patient knowledge and perception of radiation risk in diagnostic imaging: a cross-sectional study. J Patient Exp 7:110–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374373518825118CrossRefPubMed

34.

Busey JM, Soine LA, Yager JR, Choi E, Shuman WP (2013) Patient knowledge and understanding of radiation from diagnostic imaging. JAMA Intern Med 173:239–241. https://doi.org/10.1001/2013.jamainternmedCrossRefPubMed

35.

Lumbreras B, Vilar J, Gonzalez-Alvarez I et al (2017) Avoiding fears and promoting shared decision-making: how should physicians inform patients about radiation exposure from imaging tests? PLoS One 12:e0180592. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180592CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Ludwig R, Turner L (2002) Effective patient education in medical imaging: public perceptions of radiation exposure risk. J Allied Health 31:159–166PubMed

37.

Morrison AK, Brousseau DC, Brazauskas R, Levas MN (2015) Health literacy affects likelihood of radiology testing in the pediatric emergency department. J Pediatr 166:1037–41.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2014.12.009CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Gebhard RD, Goske MJ, Salisbury SR, Leopard AC, Hater DM (2015) Improving health literacy: use of an informational brochure improves parents’ understanding of their child’s fluoroscopic examination. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:W95–W103. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.12573CrossRefPubMed

39.

Faggioni L, Paolicchi F, Bastiani L, Guido D, Caramella D (2017) Awareness of radiation protection and dose levels of imaging procedures among medical students, radiography students, and radiology residents at an academic hospital: results of a comprehensive survey. Eur J Radiol 86:135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.10.033CrossRefPubMed

40.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC Clear Communication Index. US Department of Health and Human Services 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/ccindex/index.html

41.

Haygood TM (2019) Patient literacy and access to radiology information. Radiology 291:119–120. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019190007CrossRefPubMed

42.

Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S (2012) Shared decision making—pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 366:780–781. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1109283CrossRefPubMed

Title: Readability of patient education materials related to radiation safety: What are the implications for patient-centred radiology care?
Authors: Francis T. Delaney
Tiarnán Ó. Doinn
James M. Broderick
Emma Stanley
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Keyword: Care
Published in: Insights into Imaging / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01094-3

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Readability of patient education materials related to radiation safety: What are the implications for patient-centred radiology care?

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

How does DICOM support big data management? Investigating its use in medical imaging community

2D-shear wave elastography: number of acquisitions can be reduced according to clinical setting

Quantitative ultrasound shear wave elastography (USWE)-measured tissue stiffness correlates with PIRADS scoring of MRI and Gleason score on whole-mount histopathology of prostate cancer: implications for ultrasound image-guided targeting approach

CT appearances, patterns of progression, and follow-up of COVID-19: evaluation on thin-section CT

Hemosiderin deposition evaluation in hemophilic ankle joints: association between US finding and gradient-recalled echo MR imaging sequence

Comparison of three embolic materials at partial splenic artery embolization for hypersplenism: clinical, laboratory, and radiological outcomes