The development of patient information leaflets incorporating patient diversity considerations: Varicocele embolisation and fluoroscopy guided joint injection examinations. (October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Vassallo, T.; Mizzi, A.; Depasquale, R.; Maher, M.; Rainford, L.
• Is Part Of: Radiography. Volume 24(2018)Supplement 1
• Page Start: S20
• Page End: S27
• Publication Date: 2018-10
• Subjects: Patient information leaflets -- Diverse patient needs Varicocele embolisation -- Fluoroscopy guided joint injection -- Readability -- Comprehensibility -- Adherence; Diagnostic imaging -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Diagnostic Imaging -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Imagerie pour le diagnostic -- Périodiques; Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Cancer -- Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2018.06.006
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1078-8174

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: The production of patient information leaflets (PILs) for diverse patient cohorts is challenging. This study developed varicocele and fluoroscopy guided joint injection (FLGJI) procedural PILs. Methodology: Evidence-based PILs were developed, providing radiological procedural information – preparation, explanation of interventional procedures and aftercare. PIL readability was tested via validated readability programs: Flesch Kincaid and Flesch ease reading score methods. Radiology approval of PIL(s) content was confirmed. PILs were distributed with appointment information. Patient interviews were conducted just prior to examination and by telephone, 7 days post procedure. Results: Participants were purposely sampled (6 months): varicocele embolisation (n = 17) and FLGJI (n = 47). Overall 78.1% of all participants preferred Maltese leaflets. Varicocele embolisation patients were generally younger and a greater percentage educated to tertiary level compared to FLGJI patients. Education and age were found to be recurrent significant variables in the patient demographics and responses for both patient cohorts. Age versus education for the FLGJI cohort proved to be significant for several responses. Readability statistics identified the FLGJI leaflet as a plain English rating, the varicocele embolisation leaflet was more difficult. Patient feedback identified 'what is a varicocele?' as important to varicocele embolisation patients whereas FLGJI patients chose, 'advice about aftercare' and 'advice about pain management', highlighting differences in patients' priorities between procedures. Conclusion: PILs provided tangible, accurate information pre and post examination. Patient involvement in achieving appropriate information informed the PILs development, which were adopted clinically. The development of tailored PILs to meet the diversity of other interventional radiology procedures is recommended. Highlights: The importance of testing PIL readability for different patient cohorts is identified. Diversity in patient demographics for different radiology procedures impacts on PIL development. Age, education levels and native language are patient demographics requiring consideration. Patient, radiographer and clinician involvement in PIL development is essential.