Cargando…

A Health Communication Assessment of Web-based Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patient Education Materials

BACKGROUND: The current care pathway for screening, diagnosis, and treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is often fragmented and heavily reliant on patient action, leading to delays and gaps in care, which disproportionately affect race and ethnic minorities. There is a need for well-designed,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Robbins, Rebecca, Dudley, Katherine A., Monten, Kristen N., Le, Colin, Hanes, Sherry, Patel, Sanjay R., Bertisch, Suzanne M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Thoracic Society 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9131885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35634002
http://dx.doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2021-0055OC
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The current care pathway for screening, diagnosis, and treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is often fragmented and heavily reliant on patient action, leading to delays and gaps in care, which disproportionately affect race and ethnic minorities. There is a need for well-designed, accessible patient education materials (PEMs) to improve OSA awareness and empower those at risk for the condition with the necessary knowledge and skills to adhere to treatment. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to evaluate the understandability, accessibility, actionability, and readability of web-based PEMs designed for patients with OSA and their families and caregivers. METHODS: We engaged patients with OSA, clinicians, and patient advocates (n = 11) to identify a list of web-based OSA PEMs from the media, medical centers, medical device companies, and health professional and patient advocacy organizations. Two trained coders scored the PEMs using validated health communication assessments, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Clear Communication Index (CCI; on a scale from 0 to 100%); the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), which features subscales for understandability and actionability, each measured from 0 to 100%; and readability measures, including the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook and Flesch-Kincaid, which correspond to grade levels. RESULTS: We identified 20 web-based PEMs, which included websites (n = 12, 60%), online flyers (n = 4, 20%), videos (n = 3, 15%), and one discussion board (n = 1, 5%). Scores on the CCI ranged from 21.4 to 85.7%. No PEMs met the CCI cutoff (90%). Scores on the PEMAT scales for understandability ranged from 37.5 to 100%. Scores on the PEMAT scales for actionability ranged from 0 to 100%. Fifteen percent of the PEMs met the PEMAT cutoff for understandability and actionability. Readability of the PEMs ranged from a 5th to a 15th-grade reading level, as scored by the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook and Flesch-Kincaid. Only one PEM (5%) met the recommended sixth-grade reading level. CONCLUSION: Our study found that the majority of commonly used web-based PEMs for OSA did not meet recommended standards for clear communication and health literacy demands. OSA practitioners and future research should consider health communication best practices to design PEMs that reduce the gap between materials and average patient health literacy.