Does the Quality,Accuracy,and Readability of Information about Lateral Epicondylitis on the Internet Vary with the Search Term Used?

Abstract

Background

Concern exists over the quality, accuracy, and accessibility of online information about health care conditions. The goal of this study is to evaluate the quality, accuracy, and readability of information available on the internet about lateral epicondylitis.

Methods

We used three different search terms (“tennis elbow,”“lateral epicondylitis,” and “elbow pain”) in three search engines (Google, Bing, and Yahoo) to generate a list of 75 unique websites. Three orthopedic surgeons reviewed the content of each website and assessed the quality and accuracy of information. We assessed each website's readability using the Flesch-Kincaid method. Statistical comparisons were made using ANOVA with post hoc pairwise comparisons.

Results

The mean reading grade level was 11.1. None of the sites were under the recommended sixth grade reading level for the general public. Higher quality information was found when using the terms “tennis elbow” and “lateral epicondylitis” compared to “elbow pain” (p<0.001). Specialty society websites had higher quality than all other websites (p<0.001). The information was more accurate if the website was authored by a health care provider when compared to non-health care providers (p=0.003). Websites seeking commercial gain and those found after the first five search results had lower quality information.

Conclusions

Reliable information about lateral epicondylitis is available online, especially from specialty societies. However, the quality and accuracy of information vary significantly with the search term, website author, and order of search results. This leaves less educated patients at a disadvantage, particularly because the information we encountered is above the reading level recommended for the general public.

Keywords

Internet Patient education Health literacy Lateral epicondylitis Tennis elbow Online education Readability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Tennis elbow (lateral epicondylitis)—your orthopaedic connection—AAOS. 2009. Available at: http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=A00068. Accessed 03 Feb 2012.

Badarudeen

Sabharwal

. Readability of patient education materials from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America web sites. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;1:199–204.

Berkman

Sheridan

Donahue

. Low health literacy and health outcomes: an updated systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2011;2:97–107.

Bluman

Foley

Chiodo

. Readability of the patient education section of the AOFAS website. Foot Ankle Int. 2009;4:287–91.

Butler

Foster

. Back pain online: a cross-sectional survey of the quality of web-based information on low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;4:395–401.

Cline

Haynes

. Consumer health information seeking on the internet: the state of the art. Health Educ Res. 2001;6:671–92.

Cotugna

Vickery

Carpenter-Haefele

. Evaluation of literacy level of patient education pages in health-related journals. J Community Health. 2005;3:213–9.

D'Alessandro

Kingsley

Johnson-West

. The readability of pediatric patient education materials on the world wide web. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;7:807–12.

Doak

Root

. Teaching patients with low literacy skills. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1996.

10.

Experian Hitwise. Search engine analysis. 2011. Available at: http://www.hitwise.com/us/datacenter/main/dashboard-23984.html. Accessed 21 Dec 2011.

11.

Eysenbach

Diepgen

. Towards quality management of medical information on the internet: evaluation, labelling, and filtering of information. BMJ. 1998;7171:1496–500.

12.

Freda

. The readability of American Academy of Pediatrics patient education brochures. J Pediatr Health Care. 2005;3:151–6.

13.

Greene

Appel

Reinert

. Lumbar disc herniation: evaluation of information on the internet. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;7:826–9.

14.

Greywoode

Bluman

Spiegel

. Readability analysis of patient information on the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery website. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;5:555–8.

15.

Gupte

Hassan

McDermott

. The internet—friend or foe? A questionnaire study of orthopaedic out-patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2002;3:187–92.

16.

Jariwala

Kandasamy Abboud

. Patients and the internet: a demographic study of a cohort of orthopaedic out-patients. Surgeon. 2004;2:103–6.

17.

Irvin

Guzman

Bombardier

. Surfing for back pain patients: the nature and quality of back pain information on the internet. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;5:545–57.

18.

Mathur

Shanti

Brkaric

. Surfing for scoliosis: the quality of information available on the internet. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;23:2695–700.

19.

McMullan

. Patients using the internet to obtain health information: how this affects the patient-health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;1–2:24–8.

20.

Morr

Shanti

Carrer

. Quality of information concerning cervical disc herniation on the internet. Spine J. 2010;4:350–4.

21.

Neelapala

Duvvi

Kumar

. Do gynaecology out-patients use the internet to seek health information? A questionnaire survey. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008;2:300–4.

22.

Polishchuk

Hashem

Sabharwal

. Readability of online patient education materials on adult reconstruction web sites. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(5):716–9.

23.

Rahmqvist

Bara

. Patients retrieving additional information via the internet: a trend analysis in a Swedish population, 2000–05. Scand J Public Health. 2007;5:533–9.

24.

Rangel

. United States Congress-House of Representatives–Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 2009.

25.

Rokade

Kapoor

Rao

. Has the internet overtaken other traditional sources of health information? Questionnaire survey of patients attending ENT outpatient clinics. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2002;6:526–8.

26.

Sabharwal

Badarudeen

Unes Kunju

. Readability of online patient education materials from the AAOS web site. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;5:1245–50.

27.

Sethuram

Weerakkody

. Health information on the internet. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;2:119–21.

28.

Trotter

Morgan

. Patients' use of the internet for health related matters: a study of internet usage in 2000 and 2006. Health Informatics J. 2008;3:175–81.

29.

Ullrich

Jr Vaccaro

. Patient education on the internet: opportunities and pitfalls. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;7:E185–8.

30.

Vives

Young

Sabharwal

. Readability of spine-related patient education materials from subspecialty organization and spine practitioner websites. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;25:2826–31.

31.

Wald

Dube

Anthony

. Untangling the web—the impact of internet use on health care and the physician-patient relationship. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;3:218–24.

32.

Wallace

Lennon

. American Academy of Family Physicians patient education materials: can patients read them? Fam Med. 2004;8:571–4.

33.

Wang

Capo

Orillaza

. Readability and comprehensibility of patient education material in hand-related web sites. J Hand Surg Am. 2009;7:1308–15.

34.

Weiss

. Health literacy and patient safety: Help patients understand—a manual for clinicians. 2007. Available at: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/367/healthlitclinicians.pdf. Accessed 21 Dec 2011.