Readability and content gaps in online epilepsy surgery materials as potential health literacy and shared‐decision‐making barriers

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveEpilepsy surgery is an effective albeit underused treatment for refractory epilepsy, and online materials are vital to patient understanding of the complex process. Our goal is to analyze the readability and content inclusion of online patient health education materials designed for epilepsy surgery.MethodsA private browser setting was used on Google and Bing to identify the top 100 search results for the terms “epilepsy+surgery”. Scientific papers, insurance pages, pay‐wall access sites, and non‐text content were excluded. The website text was reformatted to exclude graphics, contact information, links, and headers. Readability metrics were calculated using an online tool. Text content was analyzed for inclusion of important concepts (pre‐surgical evaluation, complications, risks of continued seizures, types of surgery, complimentary diagrams/audiovisual material). Comparison of readability and content inclusion was performed as a function of organization types (epilepsy center, community health organization, pediatric‐specific) and location (region, country).ResultsBrowser search yielded 82 distinct websites with information regarding epilepsy surgery, with 98.7% of websites exceeding the recommended 6th‐grade reading level for health information. Epilepsy centers had significantly worse readability (Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) P < 0.01 and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) P < 0.05). Content analysis showed that only 37% of websites discuss surgical side effects and only 23% mention the risks of continued seizures. Epilepsy centers were less likely to report information on surgical side effects (P < 0.001). UK‐based websites had better readability (FKGL P < 0.01 and FRE P < 0.01) and were more likely to discuss side effects (P = 0.01) compared to US‐based websites.SignificanceThe majority of online health content is overly complex and relatively incomplete in multiple key areas important to health literacy and understanding of surgical candidacy. Our findings suggest academic organizations, including level 4 epilepsy centers, need to simplify and broaden online education resources. More comprehensive, publicly accessible, and readable information may lead to better‐shared decision‐making.