Varicocele Embolization: An Assessment of the Quality and Readability of Online Patient Information

Abstract

Varicocele embolization is a growing treatment modality owing to the safety, efficacy, and quick return to work following the procedure. The internet is the most dominant source of information for many. We aimed to assess the quality of information accessible by patients considering treatment. A list of applicable, commonly used searchable terms was generated. Each term was assessed across the five most-used English language search engines to determine the two most commonly used terms. These two terms were then investigated across each search engine, with the first 25 web pages returned by each engine included for analysis. Duplicate web pages, nontext content such as video or audio, and web pages behind paywalls were excluded. Web pages were analyzed for quality and readability using validated tools including DISCERN score, JAMA Benchmark Criteria, HONcode Certification, Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Gunning-Fog Index. Secondary features including age, rank, author, and publisher were recorded. The most common applicable terms were "Testicular embolization" (378,300 results) and "Varicocele embolization" (375,800 results). Mean DISCERN quality of information provided by websites is "fair"; Adherence to JAMA Benchmark Criteria was 13.5%. Flesh-Kincaid readability tests demonstrated an average "9th grade" reading level. Scientific journals showed the highest quality scores, but were least up to date with an average web page age of 11.2 years. Web pages produced by "for-profit" organizations were the second most current (average age 2.7 years), but displayed the lowest quality of information scores. While quality of online information available to patients is "fair," adherence to JAMA benchmark criteria is poor. "For-profit" organization websites are far more numerous and significantly more up-to-date, yet showed significantly lower quality of information scores. Scientific journals were unsurprisingly of higher quality, yet more challenging for the general public to read. These findings call for the production of high-quality and comprehensible content regarding interventional radiology, where physicians can reliably direct their patients for information.