Quality and Readability of Online Information on In-Office Vocal Fold Injections

Abstract

Objectives: Vocal fold injection augmentations are increasingly being performed in the office setting on awake patients, as opposed to the operating room. These procedures thus require patient cooperation and education. As the Internet is a widely-used resource for patients, our aim was to assess the quality and readability of online resources on in-office awake vocal fold injections. Methods: An online Google search using the terms “office vocal fold injection medialization” and “awake vocal fold injection” was conducted. The first 50 English-language websites were categorized into professional- and patient-targeted, and major and minor sources. They were analyzed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) test, and DISCERN quality score. Results: Fifty websites were evaluated, and the overall DISCERN score was 2.60 ± 1.01, the mean FRES was 32.16 ± 19.10, and the mean FKGL was 13.76 ± 4.12. Between the 25 professional-targeted and 25 patient-targeted websites, professional-targeted sites had significantly higher DISCERN ( P < .05) and FKGL ( P < .05) scores, and lower FRES ( P < .05) scores. Between the 30 major and 20 minor websites, major websites had significantly lower FRES ( P < .05) and higher FKGL ( P < .05) scores, and there was a trend toward significance for higher DISCERN scores ( P = .052). Conclusions: Our study shows that half of the top Google results for our topic were not written for patient education, but rather for health care professionals. The reading level of this information exceeds the recommended grade level for patient education materials, and may be less comprehensible than intended. While patient-targeted materials are easier to read than professional-targeted sites, they are of lower quality. The quality of the available online information on this topic is suboptimal for both patients and health care providers. This research highlights the need for more appropriate patient education materials given low health literacy rates.

Readability and quality assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to nasal septoplasty

“…However, studies have shown that online PEMs are often written at a much higher literacy level [13][14][15][16]. Within the realm of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS), several studies have revealed that online information on OHNS procedures and conditions are written above the recommended grade level and are lacking in terms of quality [17][18][19][20][21][22][23]. Since septoplasty is a common OHNS procedure, it is important that clinicians evaluate the information patients are accessing online about their surgery.…”

Quality and readability of online information on idiopathic subglottic stenosis

“…52 Three previous peer-reviewed publications of the senior author also used these three instruments. [14][15][16] Google was chosen as the search engine as it owns about 91% of the search engine market share. 54 Other search engines, like Yahoo and Bing, may have yielded slightly different results.…”

“…Four previous publications by the senior author also used 50 websites with similar methodology. [14][15][16]37 Despite the current state of ISS website quality and readability, there are benefits associated with online resources. For instance, a large online community of patients diagnosed with ISS belongs to a Facebook group called "Living with Idiopathic Subglottic Stenosis.…”

Combining Readability Formulas and Machine Learning for Reader-oriented Evaluation of Online Health Resources

“…shown in Table 1. These formulas have been supporting researchers' studies for assessing and subsequently improving readability of assorted types of reading materials [26][27]. As its definition goes "… the level of ease or difficulty with which text material can be understood by a particular reader who is reading that text …" [28], readability is a relative concept which largely depends on the readers of the text.…”