Do We Have Effective Patient Education Materials for Age-Related Hearing Loss?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore and compare the readability and suitability of patient education materials (PEMs) on topics of age-related hearing loss (ARHL) supplied by electronic health record (EHR) systems and organizations specializing in communication sciences and disorders (CSD). Method PEMs on ARHL were identified through a computerized search of EHR databases and CSD organization websites. Selected PEMs were assessed using three readability indices as well as the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM; Doak et al., 1996), which is a standardized tool to assess the content and design of written educational materials. Ten PEMs from EHR databases and 17 PEMs from CSD organizations were analyzed. Results Overall, 66.7% of PEMs were written above the eighth-grade readability target. PEMs from CSD organizations were significantly more difficult to read compared to those from EHR databases. In total, 85.2% of PEMs were classified as “adequate” using the SAM analysis. No significant SAM score differences were found between PEMs from CSD organizations and those from EHR databases. Common areas of weakness among PEMs were (a) failure to include a summary of key information, (b) reading level, (c) vocabulary (too advanced for the intended audience), and (d) limited subdivision of complex topics. Conclusions The readability and suitability of PEMs on topics of ARHL supplied by EHR providers and CSD organizations are not supportive of the health literacy skills of the average U.S. adult. It is critical to improve the readability, suitability, and comprehensibility of PEMs on ARHL to make information about hearing health care more accessible and usable.

Differences Between Older Adults Who Do and Do Not Try Hearing Aids and Between Those Who Keep and Return the Devices

“…Something as simple as use of language, written, and oral, that is appropriate for the older adult’s health literacy can have an impact on hearing-aid uptake ( Klyn et al., 2020 ; Sciacca et al., 2017 ). Yet, even widely available written materials are often presented at a level that is inappropriate for older adults (e.g., Squires & Ou, 2020 ). The nature of the communication interactions between audiologists and older patients, moreover, is typically not patient-centered ( Grenness et al., 2015a , 2015b ), although this does not appear to impact hearing-aid uptake per se ( Meyer et al., 2017 ).…”