Revising Recruitment for Focus Groups to Meet Shifting Needs During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced researchers to modify recruitment strategies to meet accrual goals for qualitative studies. Traditional methods of in-person recruiting and using paper marketing material were eliminated almost overnight at the onset of the pandemic. Researchers quickly adapted their recruitment strategies, but researchers had to shift local, in-person recruitment efforts to solely using online platforms. The shifting recruitment strategies were accompanied with unexpected challenges, but we were able to meet our accrual goal for focus groups. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this brief report is to explore new recruitment strategies that developed during the COVID-19 pandemic and offer suggestions for future online-based qualitative studies. RESULTS: Prior to COVID-19, we designed four main strategies (research registry, marketing material, social media, and provider endorsement) to recruit potential participants for focus groups as part of a qualitative, descriptive study involving young women breast cancer survivors. After the onset of COVID-19, we successfully adapted each of our initial four strategies to recruit potential participants in an incremental process. Using these adapted strategies, a total of 62 young women completed the first part of the data collection process prior to participating in a focus group. Thirty-three women participated in the focus groups, and the remaining 29 participants were lost to follow-up. The vast majority of participants were recruited through marketing material and social media after making strategic changes to recruitment. DISCUSSION: The most effective method of recruitment was the strategic use of marketing material and social media, and we offer suggestions for researchers considering online recruitment methods. We recommend that researchers use various social media platforms and specific hashtags and target their sample population at the onset of the study. The data collection changes initiated by the effects of COVID-19 may remain, and researchers can consider implementing permanent recruitment strategies to best meet the needs of this new landscape of conducing online focus groups.

What's in Between the Lines: Assessing the Readability, Understandability, and Actionability in Breast Cancer Survivorship Print Materials.

Educational print materials for young women breast cancer survivors (YBCS) are supplemental tools used in patient teaching. However, the readability of the text coupled with how well YBCS understand or act upon the material are rarely explored. The purpose of this study was to assess the readability, understandability, and actionability of commonly distributed breast cancer survivorship print materials. We used an environmental scan approach to obtain a sample of breast cancer survivorship print materials available in outpatient oncology clinics in the central region of a largely rural Southern state. The readability analyses were completed using the Flesch-Kincaid (F-K), Fry Graph Readability Formula (Fry), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). Understandability and actionability were analyzed using Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials (PEMAT-P). The environmental scan resulted in a final sample of 14 materials. The mean readability of the majority of survivorship materials was "difficult," but the majority scored above the recommended 70% in both understandability and actionability. The importance of understandability and actionability may outweigh readability results in cancer education survivorship material. While reading grade level cannot be dismissed all together, we surmise that patient behavior may hinge more on other factors such as understandability and actionability. Personalized teaching accompanying print material may help YBCS comprehend key messages and promote acting upon specific tasks.

Assessing the Feasibility of an Online Module for Promoting Cancer Prevention Measures.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this pilot study were (1) to develop a cancer prevention module consisting of an animated video and a short questionnaire, (2) to assess new knowledge gained by the participants, and (3) to solicit feedback for improving the cancer prevention module. METHODS: Volunteers who previously agreed to be contacted regarding research studies were approached via email. After completing the cancer prevention module, a list of cancer prevention recommendations was provided. Newly gained knowledge was assessed, and feedback was solicited. RESULTS: Overall, 290 of 3165 individuals contacted completed the online module (9.2%), and 38.6% of the participants indicated that they learned something new about cancer prevention measures. A similar proportion, 41.4%, mentioned that they learned about measures that were recommended and due. Paradoxically, response rate was the lowest in the ≥50 year old age group although this group reported the highest rate of learning about new cancer prevention measures. Feedback was favorable in that 70.7% mentioned that the recommendations were helpful to them personally, 69.3% felt motivated to take action to reduce their risk of cancers, and 67% would recommend the online module to their friends and family. CONCLUSION: We developed an online cancer prevention module which seems to be suitable for promoting cancer prevention measures as feedback was favorable, and new knowledge was gained. Future efforts will focus on using the module to promote cancer prevention measures to the general public particularly for the ≥50 year age group.

Health Literacy Evaluation of Opioid Patient Education Materials for Orthopaedic Surgery.

Increased opioid use in the United States has resulted in greater incidence of misuse. Orthopaedic patients are more likely to be prescribed opioids for pain. Low health literacy is related to opioid misuse; therefore, orthopaedic patient education tools on use of opioids must be easy to read, understand, and use for patients of all skill levels to be effective. This project aimed to review a broad array of opioid patient education tools and evaluate them from a health literacy perspective. Content evaluation revealed that not all tools expressed the same essential messaging. The mean readability score of the tools assessed was 9.5 grade; higher than the national and recommended 8th-grade reading level. Therefore, many opioid patient education tools may be difficult for patients to read and understand. Improvements in readability and other health literacy best practices are recommended to improve reading, comprehension, and use of opioid patient education tools. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 28(3):232-236, 2019).

Patient Health Literacy and Diabetic Foot Amputations.

Patient health literacy is associated with self-care and management of chronic diseases, including diabetes. Interventions that address health literacy and aim to improve clinical outcomes have been focused mostly in primary care. The purpose of this study was to explore the association between patient health literacy and diabetic foot amputations in a retrospective cohort analysis in a large orthopaedic practice at an academic medical center. Using data extraction from clinical records, orthopaedic patients who had a diabetic foot amputation or re-amputation in the last 2 years were compared with the general orthopaedic patient population, with patient health literacy screening results as the dependent variable. Results revealed a statistically significant difference in health literacy between the foot amputee group (N = 177) and the general orthopaedic patient group (N = 14,683) (p < .0001). Patients in the foot amputee group were 8.07 times more likely to have inadequate health literacy than patients in the general orthopaedic patient group. Because diabetic amputations are frequently associated with poorly controlled diabetes, these results provide a strong rationale to develop health literacy-based interventions that address diabetes self-management and foot exams in orthopaedic practices to improve clinical outcomes, including amputation prevention.

Assessing Readability: Are Urogynecologic Patient Education Materials at an Appropriate Reading Level?

OBJECTIVE: The National Institutes of Health recommends readability of patient material not exceed sixth-grade level. Our aim was to determine readability of American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS) and International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) patient education documents. METHODS: Available English- and Spanish-language IUGA patient information leaflets and AUGS patient fact sheets were scored for grade reading level. Readability assessment was performed using Flesch-Kincaid, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, and Fry graph formulas for English documents. For Spanish documents, Fernandez-Huerta and SOL readability formulas were utilized. Each document was assessed by a health literacy expert using standards of plain language best practices. RESULTS: We assessed 86 documents: 18 AUGS, 34 IUGA, and 34 IUGA Spanish documents. Readability combined scores for English AUGS documents ranged from 8th to 12th grade level equivalents, whereas English IUGA documents ranged from 7th to 13th. Combined average readability score for AUGS sheets was 9.9 ± 1.2 grade level equivalents versus 10.5 ± 1.3 for IUGA leaflets. The AUGS documents had lower grade level equivalents on all 3 readability scales. Spanish-language IUGA leaflets had an average readability score of 5.9 ± 0.6 grade level equivalents, with a range of fifth to seventh. Health literacy expert analysis found only 1 document met all the criteria for plain language best practice. CONCLUSIONS: All assessed AUGS and IUGA patient information English documents had readability scores above National Institutes of Health-recommended reading level. Spanish IUGA documents were written at a lower reading level than their English counterparts. To best meet patient education needs, future materials development should emphasize readability and utilization of plain language best practices.

Considering Low Health Literacy: How Do the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-Short Form 20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-Short Form 7 Measure Up?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the readability and understandability of 2 commonly used pelvic floor disorder questionnaires, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-Short Form 20 (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-Short Form 7 (PFIQ-7), in a low health literacy patient population. METHODS: Flesh-Kincaid, SMOG, Fry, and FORCAST readability assessment tools were used to assign US grade levels to each questionnaire (PFDI-20, PFIQ-7). Two health literacy experts used PEMAT and ELF-Q tools to determine understandability, organization, content, and quality of each form. A focus group of women with low health literacy used Stop Light Coding and a facilitator-prompted discussion to further evaluate understandability and critique the forms. RESULTS: The PFIQ-7 required higher reading ability compared with PFDI-20 (ninth to 11th vs sixth to eighth mean grade level equivalents). Expert and focus group reviews identified concerns regarding purpose, formatting, and word choice in both forms. Focus group participants recommended assistance with questionnaire completion from clinical staff and gave mean overall ratings of 5.4 (0-10/worst to best) for PFDI-20 and 8.0 for PFIQ-7. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of potential barriers to understanding and completion may improve utilization of and accuracy of patient responses to PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 in women with low health literacy.

Health literacy and surgery expectations in total hip and knee arthroplasty patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed patients' health literacy and expectations for total hip (THA) and total knee (TKA) replacement surgery, and compared health literacy levels of patients and their caregivers. METHODS: A convenience sample of 200 THA/TKA participants, patients and their caregivers, participated in this study. RESULTS: Results demonstrated no statistical difference in health literacy between patients and their caregivers. However, patients with lower health literacy had significantly lower expectations for walking after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Practices should be aware that caregivers may not be any better equipped to consume and use complicated patient education materials than the patient they are assisting. Additionally, lower health literacy, rather than or in addition to race or social factors, may contribute to disparities in opting for THA/TKA because of lower expectations for walking after surgery. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare practices should develop patient educational materials that are easy for all patients and caregivers to understand, especially those with low health literacy. Additional patient education and counseling may help patients with low health literacy realistically align their expectations and mitigate barriers to consenting to surgery due to low expectations.

Readability of Patient Educational Materials for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

This study aimed to evaluate patient education materials that are focused on total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using health literacy best practices and plain language principles as frameworks. Readability assessments were conducted on a sample of nine patient education documents that are commonly given to THA and TKA surgery patients. Mean readability scores were compared across the sample. The mean readability grade level for the nine arthroplasty educational documents analyzed in this study was 11th grade (10.5). The mean readability ranged from 9th to 12th grade. The documents in this study were written at levels that exceed recommendations by health literacy experts. Health literacy best practices and plain language principles were suggested to reduce the demands on patients so that the documents are easier to understand. Incorporating health literacy best practices into patient education materials for THA and TKA can contribute to improved communication with patients that is necessary for patient understanding and satisfaction. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 27(1):72-76, 2018).

Health Literacy Demands of Patient-Reported Evaluation Tools in Orthopedics: A Mixed-Methods Case Study.

BACKGROUND: In response to an assessment of organizational health literacy practices at a major academic health center, this case study evaluated the health literacy demands of patient-reported outcome measures commonly used in orthopedic surgery practices to identify areas for improvement. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used to analyze the readability and patient feedback of orthopedic patient-reported outcome materials. Qualitative results were derived from focus group notes, observations, recordings, and consensus documents. Results were combined to formulate recommendations for quality improvement. RESULTS: Readability results indicated that narrative portions of sample patient outcome tools were written within or below the recommended eighth-grade reading level (= 5.9). However, document literacy results were higher than the recommended reading level (= 9.8). Focus group results revealed that participants had consensus on 8 of 12 plain language best practices, including use of bullet lists and jargon or technical words in both instruments. CONCLUSIONS: Although the typical readability of both instruments was not exceedingly high, appropriate readability formula and assessment methods gave a more comprehensive assessment of true readability. In addition, participant feedback revealed the need to reduce jargon and improve formatting to lessen the health literacy demands on patients. As clinicians turn more toward patient-reported measures to assess health care quality, it is important to consider the health literacy demands that are inherent in the instruments they are given in our health systems.

Effect of Total Joint Arthroplasty Surgical Day of the Week on Length of Stay and Readmissions: A Clinical Pathway Approach.

BACKGROUND: The demand for total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is increasing at the same time that alternative payment models place increased scrutiny on the cost of these procedures. Using a clinical pathway model, this study aimed to examine the effect of day of surgery on length of stay (LOS). METHODS: A retrospective electronic chart review was conducted on 2968 cases over 20 months at a single hospital. Least square means analysis of the effect of surgical day of the week on LOS was conducted using Statistical Analysis Software 9.3, followed by Tukey's multiple comparison test. Logistic regression assessed the effect of surgical day of week on readmission. RESULTS: Within the primary TJA group, there was no significant difference in mean LOS for each day of the week (1.17, 1.32, 1.29, 1.27, and 1.27 for Monday through Friday, respectively). Of all days, mean LOS for revision TJA (1.51, 1.57, 1.57, 2.49, and 2.03) only differed significantly for Thursday (P < .0001), although in adjusted analysis with age and American Society of Anesthesiologist, this difference was no longer significant (P = .3954). Readmission was likewise not significantly affected by surgical day of week (chi sq = 1.426, P = .8396) in the sample. CONCLUSION: As the volume of joint arthroplasties increases and alternative payment models are implemented, programs that promote decreased LOS regardless of operative day of the week are critical. Practices can use clinical pathway models to reduce costs related to LOS while maintaining a high level of patient care.

Readability of Patient Education Materials in Hand Surgery and Health Literacy Best Practices for Improvement.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to update a portion of a 2008 study of patient education materials from the American Society for Surgery of the Hand Web site with new readability results, to compare the results to health literacy best practices, and to make recommendations to the field for improvement. METHODS: A sample of 77 patient education documents were downloaded from the American Society for Surgery of the Hand Web site, handcare.org, and assessed for readability using 4 readability tools. Mean readability grade-level scores were derived. Best practices for plain language for written health materials were compiled from 3 government agency sources. RESULTS: The mean readability of the 77 patient education documents in the study was 9.3 grade level. This reading level is reduced from the previous study in 2008 in which the overall mean was 10.6; however, the current sample grade level still exceeds recommended readability according to best practices. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a small body of literature on the readability of patient education materials related to hand surgery and other orthopedic issues over the last 7 years, readability was not dramatically improved in our current sample. Using health literacy as a framework, improvements in hand surgery patient education may result in better understanding and better outcomes for patients seeing hand surgeons. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Improved understanding of patient education materials related to hand surgery may improve preventable negative outcomes that are clinically significant as well as contribute to improved quality of life for patients.

Readability of Online Patient Educational Materials on Pain Management.

Low health literacy is associated with a poorer ability to understand and follow health instructions and advice, poorer health outcomes, and poorer use of health care services. Patients with low health literacy have difficulty accessing and understanding online health materials that are not written in plain language. This study assessed the readability of patient education materials that are focused on pain, a significant contributor to clinical outcomes after orthopaedic surgery. Results revealed that the overall mean readability level of the documents that were accessed online was higher than the 10th grade. Efforts should focus on making patient education easier to understand for the nearly 80 million Americans who struggle with health literacy.