Skip to main content
AAO-HNSF 2023 Annual Meeting & OTO Experience Main banner
Icon Legend
This session is not in your schedule.
This session is in your schedule. Click again to remove it.
Back
Rate ePoster

Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

(420) Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Sialendoscopy

Monday, October 2, 2023
2:45 PM – 3:45 PM East Coast USA Time
Has Audio
Disclosure(s):
Oscar Velazquez-Castro, medical student: No relevant relationships to disclose.
Jackson M. King, MD: No relevant relationships to disclose.
Lane D. Squires, MD: No relevant relationships to disclose.
Daniel J. Cates, MD: No relevant relationships to disclose.


Introduction: Sialendscopy has rapidly evolved as a minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic treatment option for patients with obstructive sialadenitis. Despite its expanded use, there remains little patient directed information online regarding this procedure. This study specifically examined the readability of online patient-centered education materials (PEM) for sialendoscopy using a common online search engine.

Methods: An internet search for the word “sialendoscopy” was conducted utilizing the Google search engine. The top 50 results from that search were analyzed and categorized as patient- or professional-oriented material and webpages were further categorized by source of origin. Text from the included webpages were analyzed using an online readability calculator using the Flesch Reading Ease Scores (FRES) and seven other well validated reading scales. Professional-oriented and patient-oriented scores were compared using a two-tailed unpaired t-test with unequal variance. Readability scores were compared across sources of origin using one-way ANOVA.

Results: 22 websites met the inclusion criteria and were “PEMS.” Across the seven readability scales, five scales scored the PEMS at college level, one scored the material at twelfth grade reading level and the FRES scale average score was 32.8 (Difficult to read). Readability scores from all 7 instruments were not significantly different between patient-oriented and professional-oriented resources (p > 0.05). No significant differences in readability was noted amongst PEMs when evaluated by source-type (p>0.05).

Conclusions: In the digital era, an increasing number of patients are using online PEMs for health literacy. However, our findings suggest that available PEMs for sialendoscopy are written well above the NIH recommended reading which suggests that more work is needed to improve the readability of sialendoscopy PEMs to ultimately improve understanding and communication in the physician-patient relationship surrounding this procedure.