Abstract: Readability of Online Materials for Rhinoplasty

• DOI: 10.1097/01.gox.0000503200.30038.5a
• Publication Date: 2016-09-20T11:19:22Z
• Authors: Pauline Joy F Santos; David A Daar; Keyianoosh Z Paydar; Garrett A Wirth
• Keywords: Grade level; Microsoft Office; Reading level; Patient Education

INTRODUCTION: Rhinoplasty is a popular aesthetic and reconstructive surgical procedure, it one of the top five cosmetic procedures performed worldwide. However, little known about content readability online materials for patient education.1,2 Patients are predominantly using to gather information on healthcare. While there plethora material available, appropriateness not known. The recommended grade level educational seventh eighth according National Institutes Health (NIH).3 This study aims assess resources rhinoplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: largest public search engine, Google, was queried term “rhinoplasty” February 26, 2016. Location filters were disabled sponsored results excluded avoid any inadvertent bias. 10 most websites identified all relevant, patient-directed within click from original site downloaded saved as plain text. Readability analyzed established analyses (Readability-score.com, Added Bytes, Ltd., Sussex, UK). RESULTS: Analysis ten demonstrates an average at least twelfth grade. No reading (Flesch-Kincaid, 11.1; Gunning-Fog, 14.1; Coleman-Liau, 14.5; SMOG 10.4; Automated Readability, 10.7; Average Grade Level, 12.2). Overall Flesch Reading Ease Index 43.5, which rated “difficult.” level. CONCLUSION: Online available rhinoplasty exceed NIH-recommended levels, may prevent appropriate decision-making in patients considering these types surgery. Similar projects assessing other plastic surgery found above 7th or 8th grade.1,2 Outcomes this identify that Plastic Surgeons should be cognizant make efforts develop provide more materials. can also contribute marketing strategy attracting widespread interest procedure. DISCLOSURE/FINANCIAL SUPPORT:None authors has financial products, devices, drugs mentioned manuscript. REFERENCES: 1. Hoppe IC, Ahuja NK, Ingargiola MJ, Granick MS. A survey comprehension readily accessible regarding procedures. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33(3):436–442. 2. Ricci JA, Vargas CR, Chuang DJ, Lin SJ, Lee BT. assessment breast augmentation Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135(6):1573–1579. 3. How Write Easy-to-Read Materials: Medline Plus. U.S. Library Medicine. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/etr.html Accessed 25,