Abstract | March 2, 2021
Assessment of Online Patient Education Resources from American Burn Association Accredited Burn Centers Across The United States
Learning Objectives
- Consider the readability of published material relative to education level of the target audience;
- Recognize the importance of publishing materials intended for patients in line with their ability to comprehend the material's content;
- Identify reading materials that may be too advanced to provide their intended benefit to patients.
Background: The American Medical Association (AMA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) suggest patient education materials should not exceed the sixth-grade reading level. Several studies have shown that patient information has been written well above the recommended reading level across multiple specialties. The aim of this study is to evaluate the readability of online patient materials provided by American Burn Association (ABA) accredited burn centers across the United States in comparison to the current NIH and AMA recommendations.
Methods: 73 accredited burn centers were identified. Exclusion criteria included non-functional and duplicate websites. Thus, 59 centers were included in the analysis. The center’s description of services provided was copied and pasted into the Readable.io service and the following readability tests were conducted via the program: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fox Index (GFI), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). The four readability tests were compared to the recommended readability level (grade level ≤ 6.9) utilizing a one-sample t-test. A value of <0.05 was used to determine statistical significance.
Results: Of 59 websites, zero (0%) had fulfilled the recommended reading level in any of the four tests. The mean test scores for all centers (n=59) were as follows: FKGL (14.32 ± 2.507), GFI (16.2 ± 2.73), CLI (14.84 ± 2.08) and SMOG (15.84 ± 1.976). The tests were compared to a value of 6.9 with a one-sample t-test revealing a p-value of well below 0.05 for all four tests and were considered statistically significant.
Conclusions: All ABA accredited burn centers provide online educational material at a reading level well above that recommended by the NIH and AMA. Our results reveal that readability related to services provided by accredited burn centers is far too difficult for the average patient. We propose that the readability of less than the sixth-grade level be considered in order to improve patient education regarding services provided by accredited burn centers.
