首页 正文

Meta-Analysis British journal of clinical pharmacology. 2019 Jul;85(7):1396-1406. doi: 10.1111/bcp.13912 Q23.02025

Availability and readability of patient education materials for deprescribing: An environmental scan

减药患者教育材料的可用性和易读性:环境扫描研究 翻译改进

Michael Anthony Fajardo  1, Kristie Rebecca Weir  1  2  3, Carissa Bonner  1  2  3, Danijela Gnjidic  4, Jesse Jansen  1  2  3

作者单位 +展开

作者单位

  • 1 Sydney School of Public Health, ASK-GP Centre of Research Excellence, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • 2 Wiser Health Care, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • 3 Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • 4 School of Pharmacy and Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13912 PMID: 30848837

    摘要 Ai翻译

    Aims: To identify and evaluate content and readability of freely available online deprescribing patient education materials (PEMs).

    Methods: Systematic review of PEMs using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews from inception to 25 September 2017 to identify PEMs. Additionally, deprescribing researchers and health professionals were surveyed to identify additional materials. Known repositories of materials were searched followed by a systematic Google search (22-28 January 2018). Materials were evaluated using an approach informed by the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool and the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Inventory. Readability of text-based materials was assessed using the US-based Gunning-Fog Index and Flesch-Kincaid Grade level.

    Results: Forty-eight PEMs were identified. PEMs addressing deprescribing of medications for symptom control (81%) were most common. Preventative medications were rarely addressed and material (39%) focused on older people. Only 37% of PEMs provided information about both potential benefits (e.g. reducing risk of side effects) and harms (e.g. withdrawal symptoms, increased risk of disease) of deprescribing, while 40% focussed on benefits only. Readability indices indicated an average minimum reading level of Grade 12. Option Grids and Decision Aids (mean reading level below Grade 10) were most suitable for people with average literacy levels.

    Conclusions: Over 1/3 of deprescribing PEMs present potential benefits and harms of deprescribing indicating most of the freely available materials are not balanced. Most PEMs are pitched above average reading levels making them inaccessible for low health literacy populations.

    Keywords: deprescribing; health literacy; patient education.

    Keywords:patient education materials; deprescribing; readability; availability

    Copyright © British journal of clinical pharmacology. 中文内容为AI机器翻译,仅供参考!

    相关内容

    期刊名:British journal of clinical pharmacology

    缩写:BRIT J CLIN PHARMACO

    ISSN:0306-5251

    e-ISSN:1365-2125

    IF/分区:3.0/Q2

    文章目录 更多期刊信息

    全文链接
    引文链接
    复制
    已复制!
    推荐内容
    Availability and readability of patient education materials for deprescribing: An environmental scan