Assessing the Accuracy, Quality, and Readability of Online Patient Resources on Tarsal Coalition

Abstract

Category: Other; Hindfoot Introduction/Purpose: The internet is an inexpensive and convenient source for health information. However, without regulation, the quality and accuracy of the information is unknown. Tarsal coalition is a common cause of pediatric foot pain and disability. We hypothesized that the online patient information on tarsal coalition is of low accuracy, low quality, and of poor readability. Additionally, we hypothesized that sources found on the first search page were of higher quality, greater accuracy, and more readable. Methods: A cross-sectional review of the internet was performed using the term 'tarsal coalition' on the 3 most popular search engines. Unique sites were categorized based on authorship and search result order. Websites were evaluated using a novel content score based on the AAOS OrthoInfo site on tarsal coalition (max score: 20), JAMA Benchmark and DISCERN scores for quality, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) for readability. Results: A total of 47 unique websites were evaluated. They ranged from professional organization/society websites to websites for individual practices and professional blogs. The average content score was 13.1 (range: 4-20). The average DISCRN score was 34.2 (range: 19-57.5). We did find a positive correlation between the content score and DISCERN scores of the included resources (p=0.04). The average 11.4 (range 8.5-15.5). Only 2 of the websites (4%) were written at or below an 8th grade reading level, which has been documented as the average reading level of the general population in the United States. Websites that were authored by physicians had greater DISCRN and readability scores compared to academic and private practice websites (DISCERN 40.4 vs 32.3 (p=0.001) and 31.7 (p=0.01), respectively, FKGL 13.0 vs 10.4 (p=0.002) and 11.1 (p=0.03), respectively, FRE 31.5 vs 48.7 (p=0.0001) and 45.2 (p=0.025), respectively). Conclusion: Online patient resources on tarsal coalition are of low quality, inaccurate, and too complex for the average reader. Physician authored websites may serve as better resources compared to academic or private practice sites. Physicians should caution patients using the internet for information on tarsal coalition.