Hospital mammography departments have work to do on the communications front

Many patients who look to their local hospital’s website for educational information on screening mammography come away flummoxed by what they find, according to a study published online Sept. 9 in the American Journal of Roentgenology.

The researchers found that most such material is written at levels well above the reading-comprehension level of most Americans—and not much of it even tries to help patients make sense of conflicting guidelines.

Gelareh Sadigh, MD, of Emory University and colleagues identified online mammography patient info offered by all Medicare-recognized hospitals for which screening mammography metrics were publicly available in 2015.  

The team assessed the materials using readability-score algorithms and captured references to official screening guidelines.

They found that a superficially encouraging 3,252 of 4,105 hospitals had consumer websites as well as confirmable screening mammography services. Moreover, of these, more than half (1,753) offered mammography info online.

That’s where the good news ended, as only 919 hospitals (28 percent) mentioned any professional society guidelines.

Worse yet, only 14 hospitals (0.4 percent) had mean readability scores at or below the 7th grade level, as recommended by both the American Medical Association and the National Institutes of Health.

Nationally, the mean of each readability score for all hospitals varied between the 10th and 14th grade levels.

“Although approximately one-half of hospitals that offer mammography services and have websites provide at least some mammographic patient educational information online, most of this material is written at levels markedly above the reading comprehension level of most Americans,” the authors write in their discussion. “At a time when many professional society guidelines are changing and conflict with one another, only approximately one-fourth mention any guidelines to help engage patients in making their own informed screening decisions.”

“Health systems offering mammography,” they add, “should strive to better meet women’s health information and literacy needs.”

Earlier this year, researchers looking at the comprehensibility of breast-density notifications came to a similar conclusion.

Sadigh et al. acknowledge several limitations inherent in their study, including their exclusion of materials with fewer than 100 words and the inability of readability indexes to gauge the accessibility of videos and other educational aids.

Dave Pearson

Dave P. has worked in journalism, marketing and public relations for more than 30 years, frequently concentrating on hospitals, healthcare technology and Catholic communications. He has also specialized in fundraising communications, ghostwriting for CEOs of local, national and global charities, nonprofits and foundations.

Around the web

The nuclear imaging isotope shortage of molybdenum-99 may be over now that the sidelined reactor is restarting. ASNC's president says PET and new SPECT technologies helped cardiac imaging labs better weather the storm.

CMS has more than doubled the CCTA payment rate from $175 to $357.13. The move, expected to have a significant impact on the utilization of cardiac CT, received immediate praise from imaging specialists.

The newly cleared offering, AutoChamber, was designed with opportunistic screening in mind. It can evaluate many different kinds of CT images, including those originally gathered to screen patients for lung cancer. 

Trimed Popup
Trimed Popup