Abstract
Background: In response to an assessment of organizational health literacy practices at a major academic health center, this case study evaluated the health literacy demands of patient-reported outcome measures commonly used in orthopedic surgery practices to identify areas for improvement.
Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used to analyze the readability and patient feedback of orthopedic patient-reported outcome materials. Qualitative results were derived from focus group notes, observations, recordings, and consensus documents. Results were combined to formulate recommendations for quality improvement.
Results: Readability results indicated that narrative portions of sample patient outcome tools were written within or below the recommended eighth-grade reading level (= 5.9). However, document literacy results were higher than the recommended reading level (= 9.8). Focus group results revealed that participants had consensus on 8 of 12 plain language best practices, including use of bullet lists and jargon or technical words in both instruments.
Conclusions: Although the typical readability of both instruments was not exceedingly high, appropriate readability formula and assessment methods gave a more comprehensive assessment of true readability. In addition, participant feedback revealed the need to reduce jargon and improve formatting to lessen the health literacy demands on patients. As clinicians turn more toward patient-reported measures to assess health care quality, it is important to consider the health literacy demands that are inherent in the instruments they are given in our health systems.