Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Readability of out-patient letters copied to patients: can patients understand what is written about them?

  • S L Todhunter (a1), P J Clamp (a2), S Gillett (a3) and D D Pothier (a4)

Abstract

The National Health Service Plan of 2000 proposed that patients should receive a copy of all correspondence regarding their care. There is concern that the readability of patients' letters may not be appropriate for many patients.

Materials and methods:

This study determined readability scores for sequential letters written to general practitioners and copied to patients, following ENT consultations at the Royal United Hospital in Bath. Intervention involved educating clinicians in techniques to improve readability.

Results and analysis:

A total of 295 letters from eight clinicians were assessed in the pre-intervention phase. The mean Flesch reading ease score was 61.8 (standard deviation 8.7) and the mean Flesch–Kincaid reading grade was 9.0 (standard deviation 1.7). Re-audit analysed a further 301 letters. There was no significant change in the readability of the letters post-intervention.

Discussion:

It may not be feasible to present medical information intended for general practitioners in a way that is readable to most of the UK adult population.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: Dr S L Todhunter, Royal United Hospital, Bath NHS Trust Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, UK. E-mail: Sarah.Todhunter@doctors.org.uk

References

Hide All
1Ley, P. Memory for medical information. Br J Soc Clin Psychol 1979;18:245–55
2Department of Health. The Patient's Charter. Norwich: HMSO, 1991
3Department of Health. The NHS Plan: a Plan For Investment, a Plan For Reform. Norwich: HMSO, 2000
4Pothier, DD, Nankivel, P, Hall, CEJ. What do patients think about being copied into their GP letters? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2007;89:718–21
5Beyer, DR, Lauer, MS, Davis, S. Readability of informed-consent forms. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2262–3
6Clement, WA, Wales, Y. Readability and content of postoperative tonsillectomy instructions given to patients in Scotland. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2004;29:149–52
7Friedman, DB, Hoffman-Goetz, L, Arocha, JF. Health literacy and the World Wide Web: comparing the readability of leading incident cancers on the Internet. Med Inform Internet Med 2006;31:6787
8Friedman, DB, Hoffman-Goetz, L. A systematic review of readability and comprehension instruments used for print and web-based cancer information. Health Educ Behav 2006;33:352–73
9Gemoets, D, Rosemblat, G, Tse, T, Logan, R. Assessing readability of consumer health information: an exploratory study. Stud Health Technol Inform 2004;107:869–73
10Greenfield, SF, Sugarman, DE, Nargiso, J, Weiss, RD. Readability of patient handout materials in a nationwide sample of alcohol and drug abuse treatment programs. Am J Addict 2005;14:339–45
11Murray, A, Robertson, S, Bingham, B. Readability of ENT consent form amendments. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:346–7
12Paasche-Orlow, MK, Taylor, HA, Brancati, FL. Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability. N Engl J Med 2003;348:721–6
13Sutherland, LA, Wildemuth, B, Campbell, MK, Haines, PS. Unravelling the web: an evaluation of the content quality, usability, and readability of nutrition web sites. J Nutr Educ Behav 2005;37:300–5
14Tait, AR, Voepel-Lewis, T, Malviya, S, Philipson, SJ. Improving the readability and processability of a pediatric informed consent document: effects on parents' understanding. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2005;159:347–52
15Thompson, HS, Wahl, E, Fatone, A, Brown, K, Kwate, NO, Valdimarsdottir, H. Enhancing the readability of materials describing genetic risk for breast cancer. Cancer Control 2004;11:245–53
16Wallace, LS, Roskos, SE, Weiss, BD. Readability characteristics of consumer medication information for asthma inhalation devices. J Asthma 2006;43:375–8
17Friedman, DB, Hoffman-Goetz, L, Arocha, JF. Readability of cancer information on the internet. J Cancer Educ 2004;19:117–22
18Flesch, R. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol 1948;32:221–33
19Department of Education and Skills. The Skills for Life Survey. A National Needs and Impact Survey of Literacy, Numeracy and ICT Skills. Norwich: HMSO, 2003
20Office of National Statistics. Adult Literacy in Britain. Norwich: HMSO, 1996
21Davis, TC, Mayeaux, EJ, Fredrickson, D, Bocchini, JA Jr, Jackson, RH, Murphy, PW. Reading ability of parents compared with reading level of pediatric patient education materials. Pediatrics 1994;93:460–8
22Roberts, NJ, Partridge, MR. How useful are post consultation letters to patients? BMC Med 2006;4:2
23Ofo, E, Seymour, FK, Kalan, A. ENT consultant outpatient letters: are they crystal clear? Ann R Coll Surg Engl (Suppl) 2007;89:284–6

Keywords

Readability of out-patient letters copied to patients: can patients understand what is written about them?

  • S L Todhunter (a1), P J Clamp (a2), S Gillett (a3) and D D Pothier (a4)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed