Türkiye'de Elektif Üroloji ve Acil Tıp Prosedürleri için Kullanılan Bilgilendirilmiş Onam Formlarının Okunabilirlikleri Arasında Fark Var mı?

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 30 Sayı: 3, 151 - 156, 01.09.2020

Mehmet Giray Sönmez Hakan Hakkı Taşkapu Leyla Öztürk Sönmez Mustafa Kürşat Ayrancı Betül Kozanhan Togay Evrin Burak Katipoğlu Mehmet Gül

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, elektif ürolojik cerrahi uygulamalar ve acil tıp kliniklerinde uygulanan prosedürlere ait aydınlatılmış hasta onam formlarının okunabilirliklerinin, okunabilirlik formülleri aracılığı ile karşılaştırılarak değerlendirilmesidir.Gereç ve Yöntem: Acil tıbbı prosedürler için toplam 32 adet, ürolojik cerrahi uygulamalar için toplam 61 adet onam formu değerlendirmeye alındı. Ortalama kelime sayısı, hece sayısı ve hece sayısı 4 ve üzeri olan kelimeler hesaplandı. Onam formlarının okunabilirlik düzeyinin hesaplanmasında, Türkçe metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeyinin belirlenmesi için tanımlanmış olan Ateşman ve Bezirci-Yılmaz formülleri ve genel okunabilirlik düzeyini ölçen Gunning fog, Flesch kincaid formülleri kullanıldı. Bulgular: Elektif ürolojik onam formlarının okunabilirliği Ateşman, Gunning fog, Flesch kincaid formüllerine göre anlamlı düzeyde daha zor okunabilir olarak bulundu p=0.001, p

Anahtar Kelimeler

Acil tıp, aydınlatılmış onam formu, okunabilirlik, anlaşılabilirlik, üroloji

Is there a difference between the readabilities of informed consent forms used for elective urology and emergency medicine procedures in Turkey?

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the readabilities of informed consent forms ICFs used for elective urological surgical applications and those used for procedures in emergency medicine by comparing through readability formulas.Material and Methods: A total of 32 consent forms were evaluated for emergency medicine procedures while a total of 61 consent forms were evaluated for urological surgical applications. Word number, syllable number and words with syllable number of four and above were calculated. Ateşman and Bezirci-Yılmaz formulas defined for determining the readability level of Turkish texts and Gunning fog, Flesch kincaid formulas measuring the general readability level were used for calculating the readability level of consent forms. Results: Readability of elective urological consent forms was found to be at a significantly more difficult level to read compared to Ateşman, Gunning fog and Flesch kincaid formulas p=0.001,p

Anahtar Kelimeler

Emergency medicine, informed consent forms, readability, understandability, urology

Kaynakça

• Meneguin S, Aparecido Ayres J. Perception of the informed consent form by participants in clinical trials. Invest Educ Enferm 2014;32(1):97-102.
• Tanrıöver MD, Yıldırım HH, Ready FND, Çakır B, Akalın HE. Sağlık Okuryazarlığı Araştırması. Birinci Baskı, Sağ- lık-Sen Yayınları, Ankara. 2014;17-27.
• Borello A, Ferrarese A, Passera R, et al. Use of a simplified consent form to facilitate patient understanding of infor- med consent for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Open Med (Wars) 2016 Dec 16;11(1):564-73.
• Boztaş N, Özbilgin Ş, Öçmen E, Altuntaş G, Özkardeşler S, Hancı V, Günerli A. Evaluating the Readibility of Informed Consent Forms Available Before Anaesthesia: A Compara- tive Study. Turk J Anaesth Reanim 2014; 42: 140-4.
• Ateşman E. Measuring readability in Turkish. A.U. Tömer Language Journal 1997;58:171–4.
• Bezirci B, Yılmaz AE. A software library for measurement of readability of texts and a new readability metric for tur- kish. Dokuz Eylul University Faculty Of Engineering Jour- nal Of Science And Engineering 2010;12(3):49-62.
• Flesch, Rudolph. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Phycol 1948;32(3):221.
• Gunning R. “The Technique of Clear Writing”, McG- raw-Hill International Book Co, New York. 1952.
• Sanghvi S, Cherla DV, Shukla PA, Eloy JA. Readability as- sessment of internet-based patient education materials rela- ted to facial fractures. Laryngoscope 2012 Sep;122(9):1943- 8.
• Eltorai AE, Sharma P, Wang J, Daniels AH. Most American academy of orthopaedic surgeons' online patient education material exceeds average patient reading level. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473(4): 1181–6.
• Eltorai AE, Han A, Truntzer J, Daniels AH. Readability of patient education materials on the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine website. Phys Sports Med 2014; 42(4): 125–30.
• Eltorai AE, Ghanian S, Adams CA Jr, Born CT, Daniels AH. Readability of patient education materials on the American association for surgery of trauma website. Arch Trauma Res 2014; 3(2): e18161.
• Crepeau AE, McKinney BI, Fox-Ryvicker M, Castelli J, Pen- na J, Wang ED. Prospective evaluation of patient compre- hension of informed consent. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93(19): e114 (1–7).
• Mariscal-Crespo MI, Coronado-Vázquez MV, Rami- rez-Durán MV. Global analysis of the readability of the in- formed consent forms used in public hospitals of Spain. Rev Calid Asist. 2017 Jul - Aug;32(4):200-8.
• San Norberto EM, Gómez-Alonso D, Trigueros JM, Quiro- ga J, Gualis J, Vaquero C. Readability of surgical informed consent in Spain. Cir Esp 2014 Mar;92(3):201-7.
• Eltorai AE, Naqvi SS, Ghanian S, et al. Readability of In- vasive Procedure Consent Forms. Clin Transl Sci 2015 Dec;8(6):830-3.
• Gargoum FS, O'Keeffe ST. Readability and content of pa- tient information leaflets for endoscopic procedures. Ir J Med Sci 2014 Sep;183(3):429-32.
• Barro R, Lee JW. Educational Attainment Dataset. [Online] Available at: http://www.barrolee.com/ Accessed Septem- ber 4, 2011.
• Pruthi A, Nielsen ME, Raynor MC, Woods ME, Wallen EM, Smith AB. Readability of American online patient educati- on materials in urologic oncology: a need for simple com- munication. Urology 2015 Feb;85(2):351-6.
• Shukla AN, Daly MK, Legutko P. Informed consent for cataract surgery: patient understanding of verbal, written, and videotaped information. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012 Jan;38(1):80-4.