IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v28y2019i5p567-582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Effective Are Patient Education Materials in Educating Patients?

Author

Listed:
  • Ayla Keçeci
  • Sadiye Toprak
  • Seçil Kiliç

Abstract

The aim of this research was to evaluate the patient education materials prepared and published by nurses and physicians in terms of the qualitative properties of these materials, including readability, understandability, and actionability. A total of 38 patient education materials prepared by nurses and physicians in a university hospital in Turkey were evaluated. The readability of the materials was assessed using the formulas proposed by Atesman and Cetinkaya. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) form was used for estimating the understandability and actionability. Data were analyzed using the percentile and mean values, and the Kendall’s Tau-c and correlation tests were used for interobserver agreement. According to the assessments based on the readability formulas, 55.3% of the materials were moderately difficult, while 81.6% had instructional-level readability (U.S. Grades 8 and 9) with a moderate to low level of understandability and actionability. Consequently, the patient education materials evaluated in our study had a moderate level of readability, understandability, and actionability.

Suggested Citation

  • Ayla Keçeci & Sadiye Toprak & Seçil Kiliç, 2019. "How Effective Are Patient Education Materials in Educating Patients?," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 28(5), pages 567-582, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:28:y:2019:i:5:p:567-582
    DOI: 10.1177/1054773817740521
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1054773817740521
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1054773817740521?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:28:y:2019:i:5:p:567-582. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.