Readability of printed educational materials used to inform potential and actual ostomates
Readability of printed educational materials used to inform potential and actual ostomates
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-2702.1996.tb00268.x
复制
发表时间：
1996-11-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Coey, L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Coey, L
本文主要涉及使用可读性公式来确定提供给造口患者的印刷教育材料 (PEM) 的阅读难易程度。虽然特定的临床重点是造口护理护理，但内容与所有使用印刷文本告知患者的护士相关。与单独的口头表达相比，PEM 在传达信息方面具有显着的优势。描述了使用 Flesch、FOG 和 SMOG 可读性公式计算可读性的方法。简要回顾了影响可读性的表示因素，包括“空白”的使用、字体大小和纸张颜色。讨论了功能性文盲问题和间接评估患者识字能力的必要性。使用中的 PEM 经常被发现难以阅读。压力被认为是进一步降低患者处理信息能力的潜在因素。对三种市售 PEM 的可读性进行了评估，它们在 FOG 指数上的得分表明，只有约 40% 的英国人口能够理解它们。建议护士评估其 PEM 的可读性并间接评估患者的读写能力，以便他们能够更敏感地将 PEM 与患者的能力和需求相匹配。
This paper is primarily concerned with the use of readability formulas to determine the reading ease of printed education materials (PEMs) given to ostomy patients. Whilst the particular clinical focus is stoma care nursing, the content is relevant to all nurses who use printed text to inform their patients. PEMs have significant advantages in conveying information compared with verbal presentations alone.Methods to calculate readability using the Flesch, FOG and SMOG readability formulas are described. Presentation factors that affect readability are briefly reviewed, including use of 'white space', font size and paper colour. The problem of functional illiteracy and the need for indirect assessment of patient literacy are discussed.PEMs in use are often found to be difficult to read. Stress is identified as a potential factor in further reducing a patient's ability to deal with information.Three commercially available PEMs are evaluated for ease of reading and their score on the FOG index indicates that only about 40% of the UK population would understand them.Nurses are advised to evaluate the readability of their PEMs and to assess indirectly the literacy of their patients, so that they can more sensitively match PEMs to patient ability and need.