Systematic Analysis of Readability of Patient Information on Internet Pages from Departments for Trauma Surgery of German University Hospitals

Abstract

Introduction The need-based information transfer in education as well as for the recruitment of patients becomes more and more relevant. Here, the internet has emerged as an increasingly important factor in recent years and therefore information pages on hospital homepages can be very helpful. However, it is known that basic text comprehension skills are lacking among large populations.

Method The aim of the present study was to evaluate the readability of the patient information available on the websites of trauma departments of German university hospitals. For this purpose, a search for information material on 10 different diagnoses was carried out. Out of 360 texts possible, 185 were found and assigned to 2 superordinate thematic areas (emergency vs. elective operations), subjected to a systematic text analysis via software “Text-Lab” and rated using 5 known readability indices (Amstad, G-SMOG, LIX, HIX, WSTF).

Results The indices used for both thematic complexes consistently showed poor readability, so that the texts only seem sufficiently comprehensible to readers with higher education. (Amstad: 21.4 ± 20.8; G-SMOG: 11.6 ± 2.0; WSTF 13.3 ± 2.1; LIX: 60.9 ± 7.6; HIX: 4.1 ± 3.2).

Conclusion For the medical information provided by university hospitals, there is a clear need for improvement in order to make the adequate acquisition of knowledge accessible to a broader spectrum of patients.

Key words

readability - readability score - internet - media - information

Publication History

Article published online:
13 January 2020

• References/Literatur

• 1 Kinnersley P, Phillips K, Savage K. et al. Interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare procedures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (07) CD009445
• 2 Jefford M, Moore R. Improvement of informed consent and the quality of consent documents. Lancet Oncol 2008; 9: 485-493 doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70128-1
• 3 Kummervold PE, Wynn R. Health information accessed on the internet: the development in 5 European countries. Int J Telemed Appl 2012; 2012: 297416 doi:10.1155/2012/297416
• 4 Dunne S, Cummins NM, Hannigan A. et al. A method for the design and development of medical or health care information websites to optimize search engine results page rankings on Google. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15: 183 doi:10.2196/jmir.2632
• 5 McMullan M. Patients using the Internet to obtain health information: how this affects the patient-health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns 2006; 63: 24-28 doi:10.1016/j.pec.2005.10.006
• 6 de Boer MJ, Versteegen GJ, van Wijhe M. Patientsʼ use of the Internet for pain-related medical information. Patient Educ Couns 2007; 68: 86-97 doi:10.1016/j.pec.2007.05.012
• 7 Cline RJ, Haynes KM. Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health Educ Res 2001; 16: 671-692 doi:10.1093/her/16.6.671
• 8 Gray NJ, Klein JD, Noyce PR. et al. Health information-seeking behaviour in adolescence: the place of the internet. Soc Sci Med 2005; 60: 1467-1478 doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.010
• 9 Levy JA, Strombeck R. Health benefits and risks of the Internet. J Med Syst 2002; 26: 495-510
• 10 Edmunds MR, Denniston AK, Boelaert K. et al. Patient information in Gravesʼ disease and thyroid-associated ophthalmopathy: readability assessment of online resources. Thyroid 2014; 24: 67-72 doi:10.1089/thy.2013.0252
• 11 Hansberry DR, Agarwal N, Shah R. et al. Analysis of the readability of patient education materials from surgical subspecialties. Laryngoscope 2014; 124: 405-412 doi:10.1002/lary.24261
• 12 Luers JC, Gostian AO, Roth KS. et al. Lesbarkeit von medizinischen Texten im Internetangebot deutscher HNO-Universitätskliniken. HNO 2013; 61: 648-654 doi:10.1007/s00106-013-2674-7
• 13 Meyer MF, Bacher R, Roth KS. et al. Systematic analysis of the readability of patient information on websites of German nonuniversity ENT hospitals. HNO 2014; 62: 186 188–192, 194–195 doi:10.1007/s00106-013-2799-8
• 14 Esfahani BJ, Faron A, Roth KS. et al. Systematic analysis of the readability of patient information on the websites of clinics for plastic surgery. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 2014; 46: 369-374 doi:10.1055/s-0034-1385936
• 15 Esfahani BJ, Faron A, Roth KS. et al. Systematic readability analysis of medical texts on websites of German university clinics for general and abdominal surgery. Zentralbl Chir 2016; 141: 639-644 doi:10.1055/s-0034-1383381
• 16 Amstad T. Wie verständlich sind unsere Zeitungen [Dissertation]. Zürich, Schweiz: Universität Zürich; 1978
• 17 Bamberger R, Vanecek E. Lesen – Verstehen – Lernen – Schreiben. Die Schwierigkeitsstufen von Texten in deutscher Sprache. Wien: Jugend und Volk; 1984
• 18 Universität Hohenheim. Hohenheimer Verständlichkeitsindex (2012). Im Internet (Stand: 07.12.2018): http://www.uni-hohenheim.de/politmonitor/methode.php
• 19 Snipes RL, Ingram R, Jiang P. Information search in health care decision-making: a study of word-of-mouth and internet information users. J Hosp Mark Public Relations 2005; 15: 33-53 doi:10.1300/J375v15n02_03
• 20 Gruca TS, Wakefield DS. Hospital web sites: Promise and progress. J Bus Res 2004; 57: 1021-1025
• 21 de Groot IB, Otten W, Dijs-Elsinga J. et al. Choosing between hospitals: the influence of the experiences of other patients. Med Decis Making 2012; 32: 764-778 doi:10.1177/0272989X12443416
• 22 DuBay W. The Principles of Readability. Costa Mesa, CA: Impact Information; 2004
• 23 Nielsen JF. Shaped Pattern for Reading Web Content (2006). Im Internet (Stand 07.10.2018): http://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content
• 24 Nielsen JF. How Users read on the Web (1997). Im Internet (Stand 07.10.2018): http://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-users-read-on-the-web