Literature DB >> 21966236

The readability of paediatric patient information materials: Are families satisfied with our handouts and brochures?

Erik Nathan Swartz1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the grade reading level of eight easily available patient handouts for parents of children with otitis media, to calculate the internal reliability and consistency of seven readability tests, and to explore the relationship between the grade reading level of a handout and parent satisfaction.
METHODS: Eight patient handouts developed for the parents of children with otitis media were collected, stripped of all formatting and analyzed using seven different readability formulas. Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to determine the internal reliability and consistency of the seven formulas. Parents were surveyed on their satisfaction with three of the handouts, and their responses were compared with the handouts' reading grade levels using ANOVA.
RESULTS: Only four of the eight handouts had a mean grade 8 or less reading level. None of the handouts had a grade 5 or less reading level. Cronbach's alpha was calculated to be 0.990, single measures ICC 0.931 and average class ICC 0.990, indicating extremely high internal reliability/consistency among the different readability tests. One-way ANOVA showed no evidence of a significant difference in parental satisfaction with the three handouts tested, despite their different grade reading levels (grades 7, 10 and 14) (P=0.24).
CONCLUSIONS: While many readability formulas are available, the high internal reliability/consistency among them indicates that only one formula needs to be used to assess readability (eg, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level formula). Because there was no difference in parental satisfaction among three patient handouts that had widely different grade reading levels, studies should explore whether writing patient information materials explicitly to achieve low grade reading level scores is a worthwhile strategy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Comprehension; Informatics; Literacy; Patient education handout; Readability

Year:  2010        PMID: 21966236      PMCID: PMC2952517          DOI: 10.1093/pch/15.8.509

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Child Health        ISSN: 1205-7088            Impact factor:   2.253


  6 in total

1.  Management of acute otitis media.

Authors:  M Marcy; G Takata; L S Chan; P Shekelle; W Mason; L Wachsman; R Ernst; J W Hay; P M Corley; T Morphew; E Ramicone; C Nicholson
Journal:  Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ)       Date:  2000-06

2.  Beware the Jabberwock and other perils of readability formulae.

Authors:  D J Mayo
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 3.157

3.  Relationships among educational material readability, client literacy, perceived beneficence, and perceived quality.

Authors:  K S French; J H Larrabee
Journal:  J Nurs Care Qual       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 1.597

4.  Readability formulas: are they enough?

Authors:  N Hoar; M E Hoar
Journal:  Contemp Pharm Pract       Date:  1981

Review 5.  Diagnosis and management of acute otitis media.

Authors: 
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 7.124

6.  Reading ability of parents compared with reading level of pediatric patient education materials.

Authors:  T C Davis; E J Mayeaux; D Fredrickson; J A Bocchini; R H Jackson; P W Murphy
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 7.124

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.