Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Ophthalmology 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Readability of patient education materials in ophthalmology: a single-institution study and systematic review

Authors: Andrew M. Williams, Kelly W. Muir, Jullia A. Rosdahl

Published in: BMC Ophthalmology | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Patient education materials should be written at a level that is understandable for patients with low health literacy. The aims of this study are (1) to review the literature on readability of ophthalmic patient education materials and (2) to evaluate and revise our institution’s patient education materials about glaucoma using evidence-based guidelines on writing for patients with low health literacy.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted on the PubMed/MEDLINE database for studies that have evaluated readability level of ophthalmic patient education materials, and the reported readability scores were assessed. Additionally, we collected evidence-based guidelines for writing easy-to-read patient education materials, and these recommendations were applied to revise 12 patient education handouts on various glaucoma topics at our institution. Readability measures, including Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and word count were calculated for the original and revised documents. The original and revised versions of the handouts were then scored in random order by two glaucoma specialists using the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) instrument, a grading scale used to evaluate suitability of health information materials for patients. Paired t test was used to analyze changes in readability measures, word count, and SAM score between original and revised handouts. Finally, five glaucoma patients were interviewed to discuss the revised materials, and patient feedback was analyzed qualitatively.

Results

Our literature search included 13 studies that evaluated a total of 950 educational materials. Among the mean FKGL readability scores reported in these studies, the median was 11 (representing an eleventh-grade reading level). At our institution, handouts’ readability averaged a tenth-grade reading level (FKGL = 10.0 ± 1.6), but revising the handouts improved their readability to a sixth-grade reading level (FKGL = 6.4 ± 1.2) (p < 0.001). Additionally, the mean SAM score of our institution’s handouts improved from 60 ± 7 % (adequate) for the original versions to 88 ± 4 % (superior) for the revised handouts (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Our systematic review of the literature reveals that ophthalmic patient education materials are consistently written at a level that is too high for many patients to understand. Our institution’s experience suggests that applying guidelines on writing easy-to-understand material can improve the readability and suitability of educational materials for patients with low health literacy.
Literature
3.
go back to reference Pfizer Inc. Eradicating Low Health Literacy: The First Public Health Movement of the 21st Century [White Paper]. New York: Partnership for Clear Health Communication Steering Committee; 2003. Pfizer Inc. Eradicating Low Health Literacy: The First Public Health Movement of the 21st Century [White Paper]. New York: Partnership for Clear Health Communication Steering Committee; 2003.
4.
go back to reference Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, et al. The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: US Dept of Education; 2006. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, et al. The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: US Dept of Education; 2006.
6.
go back to reference Parker RM, Williams MV, Weiss BD, et al. Health literacy: report of the council on scientific affairs. JAMA. 1999;281:552–7.CrossRef Parker RM, Williams MV, Weiss BD, et al. Health literacy: report of the council on scientific affairs. JAMA. 1999;281:552–7.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Muir KW, Santiago-Turla C, Stinnett SS, et al. Health literacy and vision-related quality of life. Br J Ophthal. 2008;92:179–82.CrossRef Muir KW, Santiago-Turla C, Stinnett SS, et al. Health literacy and vision-related quality of life. Br J Ophthal. 2008;92:179–82.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Muir KW, Santiago-Turla C, Stinnett SS, et al. Health literacy and adherence to glaucoma therapy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:223–6.CrossRefPubMed Muir KW, Santiago-Turla C, Stinnett SS, et al. Health literacy and adherence to glaucoma therapy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:223–6.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Juzych MS, Randhawa S, Shukairy A, et al. Functional health literacy in patients with glaucoma in urban settings. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126:718–24.CrossRefPubMed Juzych MS, Randhawa S, Shukairy A, et al. Functional health literacy in patients with glaucoma in urban settings. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126:718–24.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Muir KW, Christensen L, Bosworth HB. Health literacy and glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2013;24:119–24.CrossRefPubMed Muir KW, Christensen L, Bosworth HB. Health literacy and glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2013;24:119–24.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Weiss BD. Health Literacy: A Manual for Clinicians. Chicago: American Medical Association Foundation and American Medical Association; 2003. Weiss BD. Health Literacy: A Manual for Clinicians. Chicago: American Medical Association Foundation and American Medical Association; 2003.
12.
go back to reference Centers For Disease Control and Prevention. Simply put: a guide for creating easy-to-understand materials. 2009. Centers For Disease Control and Prevention. Simply put: a guide for creating easy-to-understand materials. 2009.
14.
go back to reference Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH. Teaching Patients with Low Literacy Skills. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott; 1996. Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH. Teaching Patients with Low Literacy Skills. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott; 1996.
15.
go back to reference Taylor-Clarke K, Henry-Okafor Q, Murphy C, et al. Assessment of commonly available education materials in heart failure clinics. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2012;27:485–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Taylor-Clarke K, Henry-Okafor Q, Murphy C, et al. Assessment of commonly available education materials in heart failure clinics. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2012;27:485–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
17.
go back to reference Kasabwala K, Misra P, Hansberry DR, et al. Readability assessment of the American Rhinologic Society patient education materials. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2013;3:325–33.CrossRefPubMed Kasabwala K, Misra P, Hansberry DR, et al. Readability assessment of the American Rhinologic Society patient education materials. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2013;3:325–33.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Tulbert BH, Snyder CW, Brodell RT. Readability of patient-oriented online dermatology resources. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2011;4:27–33.PubMedPubMedCentral Tulbert BH, Snyder CW, Brodell RT. Readability of patient-oriented online dermatology resources. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2011;4:27–33.PubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Edmunds MR, Barry RJ, Denniston AK. Readability assessment of online ophthalmic patient information. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131:1610–6.CrossRefPubMed Edmunds MR, Barry RJ, Denniston AK. Readability assessment of online ophthalmic patient information. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131:1610–6.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Koo MM, Krass I, Aslani P. Evaluation of written medicine information: validation of the Consumer Information Rating Form. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41:951–6.CrossRefPubMed Koo MM, Krass I, Aslani P. Evaluation of written medicine information: validation of the Consumer Information Rating Form. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41:951–6.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Arozullah AM, Yarnold PR, Bennett CL, et al. Development and validation of a short-form, rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine. Med Care. 2007;45:1026–33.CrossRefPubMed Arozullah AM, Yarnold PR, Bennett CL, et al. Development and validation of a short-form, rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine. Med Care. 2007;45:1026–33.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Khurana RN, Lee PP, Challa P. Readability of ocular medication inserts. J Glaucoma. 2003;12(1):50–3.CrossRefPubMed Khurana RN, Lee PP, Challa P. Readability of ocular medication inserts. J Glaucoma. 2003;12(1):50–3.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Ebrahimzadeh H, Davalos R, Lee PP. Literacy levels of ophthalmic patient education materials. Surv Ophthalmol. 1997;42:152–6.CrossRefPubMed Ebrahimzadeh H, Davalos R, Lee PP. Literacy levels of ophthalmic patient education materials. Surv Ophthalmol. 1997;42:152–6.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Brown H, Ramchandani M, Gillow JT, Tsaloumas MD. Are patient information leaflets contributing to informed consent for cataract surgery? J Med Ethics. 2004;30(2):218–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Brown H, Ramchandani M, Gillow JT, Tsaloumas MD. Are patient information leaflets contributing to informed consent for cataract surgery? J Med Ethics. 2004;30(2):218–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Barbosa AL, Martins EN. Evaluation of Internet websites about floaters and light flashes in patient education. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2007;70(5):839–43.CrossRefPubMed Barbosa AL, Martins EN. Evaluation of Internet websites about floaters and light flashes in patient education. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2007;70(5):839–43.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Edmunds MR, Denniston AK, Boelaert K, Franklyn JA, Durrani OM. Patient information in Graves’ disease and thyroid-associated ophthalmopathy: readability assessment of online resources. Thyroid. 2014;24(1):67–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Edmunds MR, Denniston AK, Boelaert K, Franklyn JA, Durrani OM. Patient information in Graves’ disease and thyroid-associated ophthalmopathy: readability assessment of online resources. Thyroid. 2014;24(1):67–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Hansberry DR, Agarwal N, Shah R, et al. Analysis of the readability of patient education materials from surgical subspecialties. Laryngoscope. 2014;124(2):405–12.CrossRefPubMed Hansberry DR, Agarwal N, Shah R, et al. Analysis of the readability of patient education materials from surgical subspecialties. Laryngoscope. 2014;124(2):405–12.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Huang G, Fang CH, Agarwal N, et al. Assessment of online patient education materials from major ophthalmologic associations. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133:449–54.CrossRefPubMed Huang G, Fang CH, Agarwal N, et al. Assessment of online patient education materials from major ophthalmologic associations. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133:449–54.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference John AM, John ES, Hansberry DR, Thomas PJ, Guo S. Analysis of online patient education materials in pediatric ophthalmology. J AAPOS. 2015;19(5):430–4.CrossRefPubMed John AM, John ES, Hansberry DR, Thomas PJ, Guo S. Analysis of online patient education materials in pediatric ophthalmology. J AAPOS. 2015;19(5):430–4.CrossRefPubMed
31.
32.
go back to reference Zaidi FH, Jones CA. Informing patients: oculoplastic surgery and the internet. Eye (Lond). 2009;23(11):2090–3.CrossRef Zaidi FH, Jones CA. Informing patients: oculoplastic surgery and the internet. Eye (Lond). 2009;23(11):2090–3.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Aldridge MD. Writing and designing readable patient education materials. Nephrol Nurs J. 2004;31(4):373–7.PubMed Aldridge MD. Writing and designing readable patient education materials. Nephrol Nurs J. 2004;31(4):373–7.PubMed
34.
go back to reference Hoffmann T, Worrall L. Designing effective written health education materials: considerations for health professionals. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26(19):1166–73.CrossRefPubMed Hoffmann T, Worrall L. Designing effective written health education materials: considerations for health professionals. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26(19):1166–73.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Visscher KL, Hutnik CML. Health literacy in Canada and the ophthalmology patient. Can J Ophthalmol. 2012;47:72–8.CrossRefPubMed Visscher KL, Hutnik CML. Health literacy in Canada and the ophthalmology patient. Can J Ophthalmol. 2012;47:72–8.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Sheppard ED, Hyde Z, Florence MN, McGwin G, Kirchner JS, Ponce BA. Improving the Readability of Online Foot and Ankle Patient Education Materials. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35(12):1282–6.CrossRefPubMed Sheppard ED, Hyde Z, Florence MN, McGwin G, Kirchner JS, Ponce BA. Improving the Readability of Online Foot and Ankle Patient Education Materials. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35(12):1282–6.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Horner SD, Surratt D, Juliusson S. Improving readability of patient education materials. J Community Health Nurs. 2000;17(1):15–23.CrossRefPubMed Horner SD, Surratt D, Juliusson S. Improving readability of patient education materials. J Community Health Nurs. 2000;17(1):15–23.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Badarudeen S, Sabharwal S. Assessing readability of patient education materials: current role in orthopaedics. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(10):2572–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Badarudeen S, Sabharwal S. Assessing readability of patient education materials: current role in orthopaedics. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(10):2572–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
go back to reference Vahabi M, Ferris L. Improving written patient education materials: A review of the evidence. Health Educ J. 1995;54(1):99–106.CrossRef Vahabi M, Ferris L. Improving written patient education materials: A review of the evidence. Health Educ J. 1995;54(1):99–106.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, et al. Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:668–74.CrossRefPubMed Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, et al. Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:668–74.CrossRefPubMed
42.
44.
go back to reference Brach C, Keller D, Hernandez LM, et al. Ten Attributes of a Health Literate Health Care Organization. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2012. Brach C, Keller D, Hernandez LM, et al. Ten Attributes of a Health Literate Health Care Organization. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2012.
Metadata
Title
Readability of patient education materials in ophthalmology: a single-institution study and systematic review
Authors
Andrew M. Williams
Kelly W. Muir
Jullia A. Rosdahl
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2415
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-016-0315-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Ophthalmology 1/2016 Go to the issue