Readability Assessment of Online Tracheostomy Care Resources

Abstract

Objectives: (1) Assess the readability of online tracheostomy care resources. (2) Compare the readability of major versus minor websites and patient- versus professional-oriented resources. Methods: A Google search was performed for “Tracheostomy care” in January 2014. The top fifty results were categorized into major versus minor websites, and patient- versus professional-oriented resources. These websites were evaluated with the following readability tools: Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook (GFOG). Results: Readability scores for the 50 websites were FRES 57.21 ± 16.71 (possible range = 0 to 100), FKGL 8.33 ± 2.84 (possible range = 3 to 12), SMOG 11.25 ± 2.49 (possible range = 3 to 19), and GFOG 11.43 ± 4.07 (possible range = 3 to 19). There was no significant difference in all 4 readability scores between major (n = 41) and minor (n = 9) websites. Professional-oriented websites (n = 19) had the following readability scores: FRES 40.77 ± 11.69, FKGL 10.93 ± 2.48, SMOG 13.29 ± 2.32, and GFOG 14.91 ± 3.98. Patient-oriented websites (n = 31) had the following readability scores: FRES 67.29 ± 9.91, FKGL 6.73 ± 1.61, SMOG 10.01 ± 1.64, and GFOG scores 9.30 ± 2.27. Professional-oriented websites had more difficult readability scores than patient-oriented websites for FRES ( P < .00), FKGL ( P < .00), SMOG ( P < .00), and GFOG scores ( P < .00). Conclusions: Online tracheostomy care resources were written at a level more difficult than the recommended fourth- to sixth-grade level for written health information. There was no significant difference in readability between major and minor websites. Professional-oriented websites were more difficult to read than patient-oriented websites.