Readability of internet-sourced patient education material related to "labour analgesia".

We evaluated the readability of Internet-sourced patient education materials (PEMs) related to "labour analgesia." In addition to assessing the readability of websites, we aimed to compare commercial, personal, and academic websites.We used the most popular search engine (http://www.google.com) in our study. The first 100 websites in English that resulted from a search for the key words "labour analgesia" were scanned. Websites that were not in English, graphs, pictures, videos, tables, figures and list formats in the text, all punctuation, the number of words in the text is less than 100 words, feedback forms not related to education, (Uniform Resource Locator) URL websites, author information, references, legal disclaimers, and addresses and telephone numbers were excluded.The texts included in the study were assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook (FOG) readability formulae. The number of Latin words within the text was determined.Analysis of 300-word sections of the texts revealed that the mean FRES was 47.54 ±â€Š12.54 (quite difficult), mean FKGL and SMOG were 11.92 ±â€Š2.59 and 10.57 ±â€Š1.88 years of education, respectively, and mean Gunning FOG was 14.71 ±â€Š2.76 (very difficult). Within 300-word sections, the mean number of Latin words was identified as 16.56 ±â€Š6.37.In our study, the readability level of Internet-sourced PEM related to "labour analgesia" was identified to be quite high indicating poor readability.

Evaluating the Readibility of Informed Consent Forms Available Before Anaesthesia: A Comparative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Informed consent forms that are used prior to administering anaesthesia inform patients before any proposed surgical procedure or treatment. They should provide patients with sufficient information about the operation and treatment. Readibility refers to whether it is easy or hard for a reader to read and understand an available text, and this is evaluated via various formulas. The aim of this study was to evaluate the readability of different informed consent forms commonly used in the anaesthesiology departments of different hospitals in our country using different readability formulas. METHODS: After obtaining ethics committee approval, the readability of different consent forms used in the anaesthesiology departments of university hospitals (n=15), Ministry of Health (MOH) education and research hospitals (n=15), and public hospitals (n=15) was analysed. Each consent form was displayed electronically in "Microsoft Word" and the number of words contained was counted automatically. The first 100 words on the first page of the forms were evaluated using the Gunning Fog, Flesch-Kincaid and Atesman readability formulations. The rate of medical terms detected within these 100 words was determined as a percentage (%). RESULTS: Different consent forms obtained from 45 anaesthesia departments were assessed using various readability formulas. According to the Gunning Fog index, the readability of the consent forms obtained from MOH education and research and public hospitals was relatively low. The Flesch-Kincaid index measured very low levels of readability in all institutions. The Atesman index displayed very low readability levels for the consent forms used in university hospitals, and low levels in other institutions. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the readability of the anaesthesia informed consent forms is low. The level of education in our country should be considered in the preparation of anaesthesia consent forms. We believe that physicians should pay more attention to this medical and legal issue.