Comments on “Readability Analysis of Patient Education Material on Rotator Cuff Injuries From the Top 25 Ranking Orthopedic Institutions”

The study presents valuable insights into the alignment of these patient education materials (PEMs) with recommended reading grade levels, highlighting an essential aspect of patient education. However, would like to highlight several important considerations that were not included in the study, which could potentially affect the overall effectiveness of these materials. A similar study that we published in 2020 in the journal also showed that the readability of patient education materials on the websites of leading orthopaedic centers in the United States was much higher than the general public's health literacy level.2 This discrepancy undermines the primary goal of effectively communicating with patients. Although readability is a crucial factor in ensuring that PEMs are accessible to patients with varying levels of health literacy, it alone does not provide a comprehensive measure of the utility and effectiveness of these materials. There are several additional dimensions that should be evaluated to paint a complete picture: Reliability: It is imperative to assess the accuracy and reliability of the information provided in PEMs. Patients rely on these resources for guidance, and any inaccuracies can lead to misinformation and potentially harmful decisions regarding their health. The study would benefit from evaluating the credibility of the sources and the evidence-based nature of the content.3 Quality: The overall quality of the PEMs, including the structure, design, and presentation of information, markedly affects patient comprehension and engagement. High-quality materials should be well-organized, visually appealing, and include supportive visuals, such as diagrams or images to enhance understanding.4 Accessibility: Ensuring that PEMs are readily accessible to all patients is another vital aspect. This includes evaluating whether the materials are available in multiple languages, are easily navigable on institutional websites, and are accessible to individuals with disabilities. Inclusive design is key to broadening the reach and effect of these educational resources.2 Comprehensiveness: A thorough evaluation should consider the comprehensiveness of the PEMs in covering all necessary aspects of the condition and its management. For RCIs, this includes information on risk factors, prevention, diagnostic procedures, treatment options, rehabilitation, and potential complications. Several studies have demonstrated the importance of these factors in patient education and the subsequent improvement in clinical outcomes.5–7 By expanding the scope of the evaluation beyond readability, we can better understand the strengths and weaknesses of PEMs and work toward enhancing their overall effectiveness. I appreciate the efforts made in this study to highlight the readability issues in PEMs for RCIs and hope that the findings of this study will encourage orthopedic centers to pay greater attention to the readability level and the overall quality of the materials they provide for patient education. Sincerely,