Scholarlink

Purpose <p>The majority of patients refer to online patient education content before elective surgeries, including Vertebral Body Tethering (VBT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality, contemporaneity, and readability of patient information web pages across different sources (teaching hospital, private HCF, commercial/news, and non-profit organization) on VBT.</p> Methods <p>The search results from Google and Bing were analyzed using a systematic approach, excluding peer-reviewed articles, insurance policy documents, and videos. Forty-seven web pages were reviewed for quality based on preoperative, operative, and postoperative information, alongside compliance with Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. The web page content was assessed using a contemporaneity score, which evaluated the inclusion of the latest research. Readability was assessed using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade level and Gunning-Fog Index.</p> Results <p>The overall mean quality score, JAMA score, and contemporaneity scores were 7.63 (95% CI 6.63–8.64) out of 16, one (95% CI 0.68–1.32) out of four, and 0.61 (95% CI 0.33–0.9) out of five, respectively. The mean Flesch–Kincaid grade level and Gunning-Fog index were 11.7 (95% CI 10.88–12.55) and 14.94 (95% CI 14.12–15.75), respectively. Higher Quality scores also correlated with better Flesch–Kincaid and Gunning-Fox readability scores (Quality score-Flesch–Kincaid grade level: <i>ρ</i> = − 0.38, <i>p</i> = 0.0074; Quality score-Gunning-Fog index: <i>ρ</i> = − 0.354, p = 0.0161).</p> Conclusion <p>Existing patient education material contains limited and fragmentary information, lacks essential details, does not reflect the current limitations of VBT, and is written at a much advanced reading level than recommended. The material requires thorough revision, given that VBT is a relatively new surgical procedure with evolving indications and outcomes.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Are we being forthright with the patients about vertebral body tethering? Quality, contemporaneity, and readability analysis of the online content about vertebral body tethering

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月15日

查看全文
  • Rajul Gupta,
  • Aakanksha Sriwastwa,
  • Saral J. Patel,
  • Neal Taliwal,
  • Alvin C. Jones,
  • Peter F. Sturm,
  • Viral V. Jain

摘要

Purpose

The majority of patients refer to online patient education content before elective surgeries, including Vertebral Body Tethering (VBT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality, contemporaneity, and readability of patient information web pages across different sources (teaching hospital, private HCF, commercial/news, and non-profit organization) on VBT.

Methods

The search results from Google and Bing were analyzed using a systematic approach, excluding peer-reviewed articles, insurance policy documents, and videos. Forty-seven web pages were reviewed for quality based on preoperative, operative, and postoperative information, alongside compliance with Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. The web page content was assessed using a contemporaneity score, which evaluated the inclusion of the latest research. Readability was assessed using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade level and Gunning-Fog Index.

Results

The overall mean quality score, JAMA score, and contemporaneity scores were 7.63 (95% CI 6.63–8.64) out of 16, one (95% CI 0.68–1.32) out of four, and 0.61 (95% CI 0.33–0.9) out of five, respectively. The mean Flesch–Kincaid grade level and Gunning-Fog index were 11.7 (95% CI 10.88–12.55) and 14.94 (95% CI 14.12–15.75), respectively. Higher Quality scores also correlated with better Flesch–Kincaid and Gunning-Fox readability scores (Quality score-Flesch–Kincaid grade level: ρ = − 0.38, p = 0.0074; Quality score-Gunning-Fog index: ρ = − 0.354, p = 0.0161).

Conclusion

Existing patient education material contains limited and fragmentary information, lacks essential details, does not reflect the current limitations of VBT, and is written at a much advanced reading level than recommended. The material requires thorough revision, given that VBT is a relatively new surgical procedure with evolving indications and outcomes.