Assessing the Readability of Online English and Spanish Language Patient Education Resources Provided by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, and American Society of Reconstructive Microsurgeons.

INTRODUCTION: The National Institutes of Health recommends that patient education materials (PEMs) be written at the sixth grade level. However, PEMs online are still generally difficult to read. The usefulness of online PEMs depends on their comprehensibility. OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the readability of PEMs from national Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) organization websites. METHODS: Patient education materials were collected from 3 prominent PRS organizations-the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS), American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS), and the American Society of Reconstructive Microsurgeons (ASRM). ASPS PEMs were organized into reconstructive and cosmetic groups, and then further subdivided into English and Spanish subgroups. ASAPS and ASRM PEMs provided cosmetic and reconstructive comparison groups to ASPS, respectively. Readability scores were generated using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and the Spanish SMOG scales. RESULTS: Overall, all PEMs failed to meet readability guidelines. Within ASPS, Spanish PEMs were easier to read than English PEMs ( P < 0.001), and cosmetic PEMs were easier to read than reconstructive PEMs ( P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between ASPS cosmetic and ASAPS PEMs ( P = 0.36), nor between ASPS reconstructive and ASRM PEMs ( P = 0.65). ASAPS and ASRM did not have any Spanish PEMs, and 92% of all ASPS PEMs were in English. CONCLUSION: Although PRS societies strive to better educate the public on the scope of PRS, PRS ranks lowly in public understanding of its role in patient care. In addition, Spanish language PEMs from the 3 PRS organizations are severely lacking. Addressing these concerns will make online patient resources more equitable for various patient populations.

Assessing the Readability of Online Patient Education Resources Related to Neophallus Reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Online patient education materials (PEMs) often exceed the recommended 6th grade reading level. This can negatively affect transmasculine patients' understanding of treatment plans, increasing barriers to care and worsening health outcomes and patient satisfaction. This study assessed the readability of online English and Spanish PEMs regarding phalloplasty and urethroplasty. METHODS: The English and Spanish terms for phalloplasty and urethroplasty were queried on Google. The first fifty results were grouped into institutional (government, medical school, teaching hospital), noninstitutional (private practice, news channel, blog, etc.), and academic (journal articles, book chapters) categories. Readability scores were generated using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook and Spanish Simple Measure of Gobbledygook scales. RESULTS: All PEMs exceeded recommended reading levels. For both procedures, English PEMs had an average reading level approximately of a university sophomore and Spanish PEMs had an average reading level approximately of a high school junior. For both procedures, English PEMs were harder to read than Spanish PEMs overall (P < 0.001) and when compared across the three categories between the two languages (P < 0.001). For Spanish urethroplasty PEMs, noninstitutional PEMs were more difficult to read than institutional PEMs (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Online information for phalloplasty and urethroplasty should be revised and/or standardized materials should be created by trans-affirming health-care providers and national organizations in order to more fully educate the public and prospective patients prior to intervention. A well-informed patient population will improve patient decision-making and surgeon-patient communication, ultimately leading to better health outcomes.

Cross-institutional Virtual Mock Oral Examination: A New Paradigm?

Mock oral examinations (MOEs) are shown to be valuable in preparation for national board oral examinations. Although traditionally conducted in-person, improved technological advances have supported exploring virtual alternatives. Furthermore, the cornoavirus disease 2019 pandemic has necessitated virtual learning. We hypothesized that the virtual platform would improve and expand the MOE experience to include collaborative institutions while approximating a board examination environment. Methods: Sixteen senior plastic surgery residents and 14 faculty from three separate programs participated in a cross-institutional virtual MOE. Over a single day, each trainee was evaluated by two faculty from a separate institution on six scenarios, including digitally interactive photographs. Immediate postexamination debriefing with feedback was performed. All participants were subsequently invited to complete an anonymous survey regarding MOE experience, accuracy, and stress level, with responses graded on a Likert scale (1-5). Results: Twenty-three participants completed the survey, with 87% having prior MOE experience; however, only 26.1% of participants had virtual MOE experience. Most found the virtual platform more convenient (4.18 + 1.18; 5-far more convenient, 1-far less convenient) and less stressful (2.32 + 0.65; 5-far more stressful, 1-far less stressful) than in-person. All participants found the examination fair, and participants found the examination valuable (4.65 + 0.57) in preparing trainees for the American Board of Plastic Surgery oral examination. Conclusions: The majority of participants found the virtual MOE experience valuable and comparable to in-person. These results reinforce that a virtual MOE provides an acceptable alternative with greater convenience and improved cross-institutional collaborative efforts.