Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspective

Objective: Well-designed patient education materials (PEMs) increase health literacy, which has been linked to better surgical patient outcomes. The quality of lung cancer surgery PEMs is unknown, however. Here we assessed printed lung cancer surgery PEMs for readability, understandability, actionab...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Woorin Jang, BS, Savanna Kerstiens, MA, Rachel Nordgren, PhD, Anne Dijkstra, MB, Marina DePablo, MPH, DNP, RN, Lauren Gleason, MD, MPH, Darren Bryan, MD, Jessica S. Donington, MD, MSCR, Mark K. Ferguson, MD, Jane L. Holl, MD, MPH, Maria Lucia Madariaga, MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2024-12-01
Series:JTCVS Open
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273624002535
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850119084457328640
author Woorin Jang, BS
Savanna Kerstiens, MA
Rachel Nordgren, PhD
Anne Dijkstra, MB
Marina DePablo, MPH, DNP, RN
Lauren Gleason, MD, MPH
Darren Bryan, MD
Jessica S. Donington, MD, MSCR
Mark K. Ferguson, MD
Jane L. Holl, MD, MPH
Maria Lucia Madariaga, MD
author_facet Woorin Jang, BS
Savanna Kerstiens, MA
Rachel Nordgren, PhD
Anne Dijkstra, MB
Marina DePablo, MPH, DNP, RN
Lauren Gleason, MD, MPH
Darren Bryan, MD
Jessica S. Donington, MD, MSCR
Mark K. Ferguson, MD
Jane L. Holl, MD, MPH
Maria Lucia Madariaga, MD
author_sort Woorin Jang, BS
collection DOAJ
description Objective: Well-designed patient education materials (PEMs) increase health literacy, which has been linked to better surgical patient outcomes. The quality of lung cancer surgery PEMs is unknown, however. Here we assessed printed lung cancer surgery PEMs for readability, understandability, actionability, and accessibility. Methods: Various lung cancer programs throughout the United States were contacted for their lung cancer surgery PEMs. The readability of the received materials was calculated using 6 readability tests. Four thoracic surgeon–advanced practice practitioner dyads scored the PEMs for understandability, actionability, and accessibility using the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool and the Accessibility Assessment Tool, with the recommended minimum threshold of 70%. One-sample t tests were performed to compare each parameter against its recommended threshold. Results: Out of 34 institutions contacted, 18 (52.9%) provided PEMs. The average reading level of the PEMs ranged from 7th grade to 11th grade, significantly exceeding the recommended 6th grade health literacy threshold (P < .01). Although mean understandability (73.7 ± 13.2%) and actionability (70.2 ± 17.8%) scores were not significantly different from the minimum threshold, and the mean accessibility score (81.8 ± 13.5%) was significantly higher than the threshold (P < .05), there was wide variation in the scores. Most PEMs scored well in organization and writing but lacked other features that can enhance patient understanding, such as visual aids and summaries. Conclusions: PEMs are written at reading levels that are too advanced for patients. Although PEMs scored well in understandability, actionability, and accessibility, analysis of individual items revealed the need for improvement, including the use of shorter sentences, more visual aids and summaries, and expansion of language translations.
format Article
id doaj-art-739601c729ef43e2b8372608bb5de5d5
institution OA Journals
issn 2666-2736
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series JTCVS Open
spelling doaj-art-739601c729ef43e2b8372608bb5de5d52025-08-20T02:35:43ZengElsevierJTCVS Open2666-27362024-12-012253053910.1016/j.xjon.2024.09.005Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspectiveWoorin Jang, BS0Savanna Kerstiens, MA1Rachel Nordgren, PhD2Anne Dijkstra, MB3Marina DePablo, MPH, DNP, RN4Lauren Gleason, MD, MPH5Darren Bryan, MD6Jessica S. Donington, MD, MSCR7Mark K. Ferguson, MD8Jane L. Holl, MD, MPH9Maria Lucia Madariaga, MD10Section of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IllSection of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IllDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IllSection of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IllPatient Experience and Engagement Program, UChicago Medicine, Chicago, IllSection of Geriatrics &amp; Palliative Medicine, Department of Medicine, UChicago Medicine, Chicago, IllSection of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IllSection of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IllSection of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IllSection of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IllSection of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Ill; Address for reprints: Maria Lucia Madariaga, MD, Biological Sciences Division, UChicago Medicine, 5841 S Maryland Ave, MC5047, Chicago, IL 60637.Objective: Well-designed patient education materials (PEMs) increase health literacy, which has been linked to better surgical patient outcomes. The quality of lung cancer surgery PEMs is unknown, however. Here we assessed printed lung cancer surgery PEMs for readability, understandability, actionability, and accessibility. Methods: Various lung cancer programs throughout the United States were contacted for their lung cancer surgery PEMs. The readability of the received materials was calculated using 6 readability tests. Four thoracic surgeon–advanced practice practitioner dyads scored the PEMs for understandability, actionability, and accessibility using the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool and the Accessibility Assessment Tool, with the recommended minimum threshold of 70%. One-sample t tests were performed to compare each parameter against its recommended threshold. Results: Out of 34 institutions contacted, 18 (52.9%) provided PEMs. The average reading level of the PEMs ranged from 7th grade to 11th grade, significantly exceeding the recommended 6th grade health literacy threshold (P < .01). Although mean understandability (73.7 ± 13.2%) and actionability (70.2 ± 17.8%) scores were not significantly different from the minimum threshold, and the mean accessibility score (81.8 ± 13.5%) was significantly higher than the threshold (P < .05), there was wide variation in the scores. Most PEMs scored well in organization and writing but lacked other features that can enhance patient understanding, such as visual aids and summaries. Conclusions: PEMs are written at reading levels that are too advanced for patients. Although PEMs scored well in understandability, actionability, and accessibility, analysis of individual items revealed the need for improvement, including the use of shorter sentences, more visual aids and summaries, and expansion of language translations.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273624002535patient education materialsreadabilityunderstandabilityaccessibilitylung cancer surgery
spellingShingle Woorin Jang, BS
Savanna Kerstiens, MA
Rachel Nordgren, PhD
Anne Dijkstra, MB
Marina DePablo, MPH, DNP, RN
Lauren Gleason, MD, MPH
Darren Bryan, MD
Jessica S. Donington, MD, MSCR
Mark K. Ferguson, MD
Jane L. Holl, MD, MPH
Maria Lucia Madariaga, MD
Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspective
JTCVS Open
patient education materials
readability
understandability
accessibility
lung cancer surgery
title Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspective
title_full Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspective
title_fullStr Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspective
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspective
title_short Assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the United StatesCentral MessagePerspective
title_sort assessment of printed lung cancer surgery patient education materials in the united statescentral messageperspective
topic patient education materials
readability
understandability
accessibility
lung cancer surgery
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273624002535
work_keys_str_mv AT woorinjangbs assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT savannakerstiensma assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT rachelnordgrenphd assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT annedijkstramb assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT marinadepablomphdnprn assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT laurengleasonmdmph assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT darrenbryanmd assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT jessicasdoningtonmdmscr assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT markkfergusonmd assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT janelhollmdmph assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective
AT marialuciamadariagamd assessmentofprintedlungcancersurgerypatienteducationmaterialsintheunitedstatescentralmessageperspective