Readability of patient education materials for bariatric surgery.
Bariatric surgery
Health literacy
Obesity
Readability
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2023
08 2023
Historique:
received:
09
04
2023
accepted:
20
05
2023
medline:
14
7
2023
pubmed:
6
6
2023
entrez:
5
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bariatric surgery is a successful treatment for obesity, but barriers to surgery exist, including low health literacy. National organizations recommend patient education materials (PEM) not exceed a sixth-grade reading level. Difficult to comprehend PEM can exacerbate barriers to bariatric surgery, especially in the Deep South where high obesity and low literacy rates exist. This study aimed to assess and compare the readability of webpages and electronic medical record (EMR) bariatric surgery PEM from one institution. Readability of online bariatric surgery and standardized perioperative EMR PEM were analyzed and compared. Text readability was assessed by validated instruments: Flesch Reading Ease Formula (FRE), Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog (GF), Coleman-Liau Index (CL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Automated Readability Index (ARI), and Linsear Write Formula (LWF). Mean readability scores were calculated with standard deviations and compared using unpaired t-tests. 32 webpages and seven EMR education documents were analyzed. Webpages were overall "difficult to read" compared to "standard/average" readability EMR materials (mean FRE 50.5 ± 18.3 vs. 67.4 ± 4.2, p = 0.023). All webpages were at or above high school reading level: mean FKGL 11.8 ± 4.4, GF 14.0 ± 3.9, CL 9.5 ± 3.2, SMOG 11.0 ± 3.2, ARI 11.7 ± 5.1, and LWF 14.9 ± 6.6. Webpages with highest reading levels were nutrition information and lowest were patient testimonials. EMR materials were sixth to ninth grade reading level: FKGL 6.2 ± 0.8, GF 9.3 ± 1.4, CL 9.7 ± 0.9, SMOG 7.1 ± 0.8, ARI 6.1 ± 1.0, and LWF 5.9 ± 0.8. Surgeon curated bariatric surgery webpages have advanced reading levels above recommended thresholds compared to standardized PEM from an EMR. This readability gap may unintentionally contribute to barriers to surgery and affect postoperative outcomes. Streamlined efforts are needed to create materials that are easier to read and comply with recommendations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37277519
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10153-3
pii: 10.1007/s00464-023-10153-3
doi:
Substances chimiques
Smog
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6519-6525Subventions
Organisme : AHRQ HHS
ID : K12 HS023009
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMHD NIH HHS
ID : K23 MD013903
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMHD NIH HHS
ID : R01 MD013858
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Buchwald H, Williams SE (2004) Bariatric surgery worldwide 2003. Obes Surg 14(9):1157–1164. https://doi.org/10.1381/0960892042387057
doi: 10.1381/0960892042387057
pubmed: 15527627
Christou NV, Sampalis JS, Liberman M et al (2004) Surgery decreases long-term mortality, morbidity, and health care use in morbidly obese patients. Ann Surg 240(3):416–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000137343.63376.19 . (discussion 423–424)
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000137343.63376.19
pubmed: 15319713
pmcid: 1356432
Pories WJ, Swanson MS, MacDonald KG et al (1995) Who would have thought it? An operation proves to be the most effective therapy for adult-onset diabetes mellitus. Ann Surg 222(3):339–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199509000-00011 . (discussion 350–352)
doi: 10.1097/00000658-199509000-00011
pubmed: 7677463
pmcid: 1234815
Sjostrom L, Lindroos AK, Peltonen M et al (2004) Lifestyle, diabetes, and cardiovascular risk factors 10 years after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med 351(26):2683–2693. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa035622
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa035622
pubmed: 15616203
Martin M, Beekley A, Kjorstad R, Sebesta J (2010) Socioeconomic disparities in eligibility and access to bariatric surgery: a national population-based analysis. Surg Obes Relat Dis 6(1):8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2009.07.003
doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2009.07.003
pubmed: 19782647
Carden A, Blum K, Arbaugh CJ, Trickey A, Eisenberg D (2019) Low socioeconomic status is associated with lower weight-loss outcomes 10-years after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc 33(2):454–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6318-6 . (In Eng)
doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6318-6
pubmed: 29987570
Congelosi PD, Carroll MC, Wong SL (2023) Numeracy levels influence shared decision-making and surgical outcomes: a scoping review of the literature. Am J Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2023.01.002
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2023.01.002
pubmed: 36623965
Miller-Matero LR, Hecht L, Patel S, Martens KM, Hamann A, Carlin AM (2021) The influence of health literacy and health numeracy on weight loss outcomes following bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis 17(2):384–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2020.09.021 . (In Eng)
doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2020.09.021
pubmed: 33082073
Funk LM, Alagoz E, Murtha JA et al (2022) Socioeconomic disparities and bariatric surgery outcomes: a qualitative analysis. Am J Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.09.049
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.09.049
pubmed: 36180301
Mahoney ST, Tawfik-Sexton D, Strassle PD, Farrell TM, Duke MC (2018) Effects of education and health literacy on postoperative hospital visits in bariatric surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28(9):1100–1104. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2018.0093
doi: 10.1089/lap.2018.0093
pubmed: 29608433
Erdogdu UE, Cayci HM, Tardu A, Demirci H, Kisakol G, Guclu M (2019) Health literacy and weight loss after bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 29(12):3948–3953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-019-04060-7
doi: 10.1007/s11695-019-04060-7
pubmed: 31290109
Hansberry DR, Agarwal N, Shah R et al (2014) Analysis of the readability of patient education materials from surgical subspecialties. Laryngoscope 124(2):405–412. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24261
doi: 10.1002/lary.24261
pubmed: 23775508
Lee KC, Berg ET, Jazayeri HE, Chuang SK, Eisig SB (2019) Online patient education materials for orthognathic surgery fail to meet readability and quality standards. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 77(1):180 e1-e180 e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2018.08.033
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2018.08.033
Gutterman SA, Schroeder JN, Jacobson CE, Obeid NR, Suwanabol PA (2023) Examining the accessibility of online patient materials for bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 33(3):975–977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-06440-y
doi: 10.1007/s11695-022-06440-y
pubmed: 36602722
Rouhi AD, Ghanem YK, Hoeltzel GD et al (2023) Quality and readability of online patient information on adolescent bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 33(1):397–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-06385-2
doi: 10.1007/s11695-022-06385-2
pubmed: 36469204
Daraz L, Morrow AS, Ponce OJ et al (2019) Can patients trust online health information? A meta-narrative systematic review addressing the quality of health information on the internet. J Gen Intern Med 34(9):1884–1891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05109-0
doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05109-0
pubmed: 31228051
pmcid: 6712138
Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association (1999) Health literacy: report of the Council on Scientific Affairs. JAMA 281(6):552–557 (In Eng)
Meleo-Erwin Z, Basch C, Fera J, Ethan D, Garcia P (2019) Readability of online patient-based information on bariatric surgery. Health Promot Perspect 9(2):156–160. https://doi.org/10.15171/hpp.2019.22
doi: 10.15171/hpp.2019.22
pubmed: 31249804
pmcid: 6588814
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevalence of self-reported obesity among U.S. adults by state and territory. Behavioral risk factor surveillance system 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html
Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). U.S. Skills Map: State and County Indicators of Adult Literacy and Numeracy (2017). https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/skillsmap/
Hecht LM, Martens KM, Pester BD, Hamann A, Carlin AM, Miller-Matero LR (2022) Adherence to medical appointments among patients undergoing bariatric surgery: do health literacy, health numeracy, and cognitive functioning play a role? Obes Surg 32(4):1391–1393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-05905-4
doi: 10.1007/s11695-022-05905-4
pubmed: 35061155
Martens K, Pester BD, Hecht LM et al (2021) Adherence to post-operative appointments is associated with weight loss following bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 31(12):5494–5496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-021-05717-y
doi: 10.1007/s11695-021-05717-y
pubmed: 34651288
Akbari K, Som R (2014) Evaluating the quality of internet information for bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 24(11):2003–2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-014-1403-y
doi: 10.1007/s11695-014-1403-y
pubmed: 25179387
Makar B, Quilliot D, Zarnegar R et al (2008) What is the quality of information about bariatric surgery on the internet? Obes Surg 18(11):1455–1459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-008-9507-x
doi: 10.1007/s11695-008-9507-x
pubmed: 18401669
Vetter D, Ruhwinkel H, Raptis DA, Bueter M (2018) Quality assessment of information on bariatric surgery websites. Obes Surg 28(5):1240–1247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2983-0
doi: 10.1007/s11695-017-2983-0
pubmed: 29110245
Volk R, Obeid N (2019) What can we do about Dr. Google? Using the electronic medical record (EMR) to prescribe reliable online patient education. J Med Libr Assoc 107(4):606–608. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2019.774
Hubner M, Diana M, Zanetti G, Eisenring MC, Demartines N, Troillet N (2011) Surgical site infections in colon surgery: the patient, the procedure, the hospital, and the surgeon. Arch Surg 146(11):1240–1245. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2011.176
doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2011.176
pubmed: 21768407
Smithson M, McLeod MC, Theiss L et al (2022) Ileostomy patients using patient engagement technology experience decreased length of stay. J Gastrointest Surg 26(3):635–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-05158-z
doi: 10.1007/s11605-021-05158-z
pubmed: 34618324
Reed RD, Killian AC, Mustian MN et al (2021) The living donor navigator program provides support tools for caregivers. Prog Transplant 31(1):55–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1526924820978598
doi: 10.1177/1526924820978598
pubmed: 33353498
de Looper M, Smets EMA, Schouten BC et al (2022) The patient navigator: can a systematically developed online health information tool improve patient participation and outcomes related to the consultation in older patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer? BMC Cancer 22(1):109. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-09096-6
doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-09096-6
pubmed: 35078438
pmcid: 8788912
Marlow NM, Kazley AS, Chavin KD, Simpson KN, Balliet W, Baliga PK (2016) A patient navigator and education program for increasing potential living donors: a comparative observational study. Clin Transplant 30(5):619–627. https://doi.org/10.1111/ctr.12728
doi: 10.1111/ctr.12728
pubmed: 26928471