A Health Communication Assessment of Web-based Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patient Education Materials.
A Health Communication Assessment of Web-based Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patient Education Materials.
复制标题
DOI：
10.34197/ats-scholar.2021-0055oc
复制
发表时间：
2022-03
期刊：
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Bertisch, Suzanne M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Robbins, Rebecca;Dudley, Katherine A;Monten, Kristen N;Le, Colin;Hanes, Sherry;Patel, Sanjay R;Bertisch, Suzanne M
目前筛查、诊断和治疗阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)的护理路径往往支离破碎，严重依赖患者的行动，导致护理延误和缺口，这对种族和少数民族造成了不成比例的影响。需要设计良好、易于获取的患者教育材料(PEM)，以提高对OSA的认识，并使那些有风险的人拥有必要的知识和技能来坚持治疗。我们的研究旨在评估为阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停患者及其家人和照顾者设计的基于网络的PEM的可理解性、可访问性、可操作性和可读性。我们与阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者、临床医生和患者权益倡导者(n = 11)联系，以确定来自媒体、医疗中心、医疗器械公司以及健康专业人员和患者权益倡导组织的基于网络的阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征PEM列表。两名训练有素的编码员使用有效的健康沟通评估对PEM进行评分，包括疾病控制和预防中心明确沟通指数(CCI；评分从0到100%)；患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)，其特点是可理解性和可操作性分量表，每个分量表的测量范围从0到100%；可读性衡量标准，包括与年级水平对应的简单衡量标准gobbledygook和Flesch-Kincaid。我们确定了20个基于网络的PEM，其中包括网站(n = 12，60%)、在线传单(n = 4，20%)、视频(n = 3，15%)和一个讨论板(n = 1，5%)。CCI得分从21.4%到85.7%不等。没有PEM达到CCI截止值(90%)。PEMAT量表的可理解性得分从37.5%到100%不等。PEMAT量表的可操作性得分从0到100%不等。15%的PEM在可理解性和可操作性方面达到了PEMAT标准。PEM的可读性从5年级到15年级不等，通过简单的gobbledygook和Flesch-Kincaid评分。只有一名学生(5%)达到了推荐的六年级阅读水平。我们的研究发现，大多数OSA常用的基于网络的PEM不符合明确沟通和健康素养需求的推荐标准。OSA实践者和未来的研究应该考虑健康传播的最佳实践，以设计PEM，以缩小材料和患者平均健康素养之间的差距。
The current care pathway for screening, diagnosis, and treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is often fragmented and heavily reliant on patient action, leading to delays and gaps in care, which disproportionately affect race and ethnic minorities. There is a need for well-designed, accessible patient education materials (PEMs) to improve OSA awareness and empower those at risk for the condition with the necessary knowledge and skills to adhere to treatment. Our study aimed to evaluate the understandability, accessibility, actionability, and readability of web-based PEMs designed for patients with OSA and their families and caregivers. We engaged patients with OSA, clinicians, and patient advocates (n = 11) to identify a list of web-based OSA PEMs from the media, medical centers, medical device companies, and health professional and patient advocacy organizations. Two trained coders scored the PEMs using validated health communication assessments, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Clear Communication Index (CCI; on a scale from 0 to 100%); the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), which features subscales for understandability and actionability, each measured from 0 to 100%; and readability measures, including the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook and Flesch-Kincaid, which correspond to grade levels. We identified 20 web-based PEMs, which included websites (n = 12, 60%), online flyers (n = 4, 20%), videos (n = 3, 15%), and one discussion board (n = 1, 5%). Scores on the CCI ranged from 21.4 to 85.7%. No PEMs met the CCI cutoff (90%). Scores on the PEMAT scales for understandability ranged from 37.5 to 100%. Scores on the PEMAT scales for actionability ranged from 0 to 100%. Fifteen percent of the PEMs met the PEMAT cutoff for understandability and actionability. Readability of the PEMs ranged from a 5th to a 15th-grade reading level, as scored by the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook and Flesch-Kincaid. Only one PEM (5%) met the recommended sixth-grade reading level. Our study found that the majority of commonly used web-based PEMs for OSA did not meet recommended standards for clear communication and health literacy demands. OSA practitioners and future research should consider health communication best practices to design PEMs that reduce the gap between materials and average patient health literacy.