Inappropriate Ordering of Multitarget Stool DNA Tests for Colon Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: CRC screening is recommended for adults aged 45-75. Mt-sDNA is indicated for asymptomatic individuals between the ages of 45 and 85, but not for those with rectal bleeding, iron deficiency anemia, adenomatous polyps, previous colonoscopy within 10 years, family history of CRC, positive results from CRC screening tests within the past 6 months, or age less than 45 and greater than 85. We aimed to determine the prevalence of mt-sDNA use when not indicated and factors associated with inappropriate testing. METHODS: 7,345 patients underwent mt-sDNA testing and were randomized using EMERSE. Charts for the first 500 patients were reviewed to determine whether mt-sDNA was ordered appropriately according to the USPSTF criteria. Seven patients were excluded due to having more than one inappropriate ordering for mt-sDNA. RESULTS: Of 500 patients, 22.2% had an inappropriately ordered mt-sDNA test. The most common reason for inappropriate ordering was having a previous colonoscopy done within the past 10 years. Rates of inappropriate testing significantly varied by race and the specialty of the ordering provider, with internal medicine providers ordering the most mt-sDNA tests. Rates of inappropriate testing did not significantly vary by sex or type of insurance. DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that providers may not be familiar with guidelines for the indicated use of mtsDNA, leading to inappropriate referrals and increased costs. Patients at increased CRC risk would benefit from a more sensitive procedure such as a colonoscopy. Future studies could understand the motivation to order testing outside approved indications through provider surveys and interviews.

Readability of patient education material in stroke: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Stroke education materials are crucial for the recovery of stroke patients, but their effectiveness depends on their readability. The American Medical Association (AMA) recommends patient education materials be written at a sixth-grade level. Studies show existing paper and online materials exceed patients' reading levels and undermine their health literacy. Low health literacy among stroke patients is associated with worse health outcomes and decreased efficacy of stroke rehabilitation. OBJECTIVE: We reviewed the readability of paper (i.e brochures, factsheets, posters) and online (i.e American Stroke Association, Google, Yahoo!) stroke patient education materials, reading level of stroke patients, accessibility of online health information, patients' perceptions on gaps in stroke information, and provided recommendations for improving readability. METHOD: A PRISMA-guided systematic literature review was conducted using PUBMED, Google Scholar, and EbscoHost databases and "stroke", "readability of stroke patient education", and "stroke readability" search terms to discover English-language articles. A total of 12 articles were reviewed. RESULTS: SMOG scores for paper and online material ranged from 11.0 - 12.0 grade level and 7.8 - 13.95 grade level respectively. Reading level of stroke patients ranged from 3rd grade to 9th grade level or above. Accessibility of online stroke information was high. Structured patient interviews illustrated gaps in patient education materials and difficulty with comprehension. CONCLUSION: Paper and online patient education materials exceed the reading level of stroke patients and the AMA recommended 6th grade level. Due to limitations in readability, stroke patients are not being adequately educated about their condition.

Online Patient Education Materials on Iron Deficiency Anemia Are Too Difficult to Read and Low Quality: A Readability and Quality Analysis.

Introduction Patients increasingly rely on online health information to understand and manage their diseases. Concerns about the quality and readability of these materials have been reported in the literature. Poor quality and difficult-to-read information lead to delayed diagnoses and adverse outcomes. We assessed the quality and readability of online health information about iron deficiency anemia (IDA) on Google. Method We searched for online web pages using the term "iron deficiency anemia"on Google. One hundred and twelve out of 200 web pages were included. We assessed web page typology, readability, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score, the DISCERN score, and the Health on the Net Foundation certification (HONcode). Statistical analysis was performed with R version 4.2.2. Result Non-profit and scientific journal web pages were the most common. Scientific journal web pages were of the highest quality. News web pages were the most readable. The first Google Page web pages did not have greater JAMA scores or lower Flesch-Kinkaid Reading Grade Level (FKGL) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) scores. Forty-six percent of all web pages were high-quality. Web pages on the first Google page were more likely to have HONCode certification. Conclusion We highlight gaps in the readability and quality of online information about IDA. Online web pages exceeded the recommended reading level for patients. Most web pages were low quality; only a quarter were HONcode-certified; and the first Google page web pages were not higher in quality than the later web pages on search.

Shopping on the Public and Private Health Insurance Marketplaces: Consumer Decision Aids and Plan Presentation.

BACKGROUND: The design of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) health insurance marketplaces influences complex health plan choices. OBJECTIVE: To compare the choice environments of the public health insurance exchanges in the fourth (OEP4) versus third (OEP3) open enrollment period and to examine online marketplace run by private companies, including a total cost estimate comparison. DESIGN: In November-December 2016, we examined the public and private online health insurance exchanges. We navigated each site for "real-shopping" (personal information required) and "window-shopping" (no required personal information). PARTICIPANTS: Public (n = 13; 12 state-based marketplaces and HealthCare.gov ) and private (n = 23) online health insurance exchanges. MAIN MEASURES: Features included consumer decision aids (e.g., total cost estimators, provider lookups) and plan display (e.g., order of plans). We examined private health insurance exchanges for notable features (i.e., those not found on public exchanges) and compared the total cost estimates on public versus private exchanges for a standardized consumer. RESULTS: Nearly all studied consumer decision aids saw increased deployment in the public marketplaces in OEP4 compared to OEP3. Over half of the public exchanges (n = 7 of 13) had total cost estimators (versus 5 of 14 in OEP3) in window-shopping and integrated provider lookups (window-shopping: 7; real-shopping: 8). The most common default plan orders were by premium or total cost estimate. Notable features on private health insurance exchanges were unique data presentation (e.g., infographics) and further personalized shopping (e.g., recommended plan flags). Health plan total cost estimates varied substantially between the public and private exchanges (average difference $1526). CONCLUSIONS: The ACA's public health insurance exchanges offered more tools in OEP4 to help consumers select a plan. While private health insurance exchanges presented notable features, the total cost estimates for a standardized consumer varied widely on public versus private exchanges.