Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Evaluation of Patient Information Texts Related to Bruxism in Turkish Websites in Relation to Readability and Content

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 177 - 181, 19.08.2024
https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1375278

Öz

Abstract
Aim: With technological developments, it has become easier for individuals to access previously inaccessible or difficult-to-find information. The Internet is the most valid way to access and share information quickly and cheaply. Health information is one of the most searched topics on the internet. This study aimed to evaluate the patient information texts about bruxism on Turkish websites regarding readability and content.
Materials and Methods: While the Ateşman readability index was used to determine the readability level of the texts, content evaluation was evaluated with general questions about the definition, etiology, clinical types, diagnosis, and treatment of bruxism. SPSS 23 statistical package program was used for data analysis.
Results: Within the scope of the study, 161 websites were examined and 100 were evaluated. Private dental clinics (78.2%) were more prominent in the search distribution. According to the statistical analysis, 85% of the websites were found to be of medium difficulty, 10% were found to be difficult, and 5% were found to be easy. In addition, it was observed that information on the etiology and causes of bruxism (62%), clinical forms (68%), diagnosis (58%), and treatment (55%) were insufficient in the patient information texts on the websites.
Conclusion: While preparing patient information texts, our society's health literacy level should be considered and more easily readable and understandable texts should be prepared. Public institutions should also inspect these texts before they are published on the internet, communicate the necessary corrections to those concerned, and allow them to be published after the corrections.
Keywords: bruxism, internet, readability, health information

Kaynakça

  • 1. LOBBEZOO, Frank, et al. Bruxism defined and graded: an interna-tional consensus. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2013;40(1):2-4.
  • 2. NIAMTU III, Joseph. Botulinum toxin A: a review of 1,085 oral and maxillofacial patient treatments. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2003;61(3):317-324.
  • 3. BADER, Gaby; LAVIGNE, Gilles. Sleep bruxism; an<<<<< overview of an oromandibular sleep movement disorder. Sleep medicine re-views. 2000;4(1):27-43.
  • 4. TRENOUTH, M. J. The relationship between bruxism and temporo-mandibular joint dysfunction as shown by computer analysis of noc-turnal tooth contact patterns. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 1979;6(1):81-87.
  • 5. DEMJAHA, Genc; KAPUSEVSKA, Biljana; PEJKOVSKA-SHAHPASKA, Budima. Bruxism unconscious oral habit in everyday life. Open ac-cess Macedonian journal of medical sciences. 2019;7(5):876.
  • 6. MASSIGNAN, Carla, et al. Poor sleep quality and prevalence of pro-bable sleep bruxism in primary and mixed dentitions: a cross-sec-tional study. Sleep and Breathing, 2019;23:935-941.
  • 7. SHETTY, Shilpa, et al. Bruxism: a literature review. The Journal of Indian prosthodontic society. 2010;10:141-148.
  • 8. KOYANO, Kiyoshi, et al. Assessment of bruxism in the clinic. Jour-nal of oral rehabilitation. 2008;35(7):495-508.
  • 9. LOBBEZOO, Frank, et al. Principles for the management of bruxism. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2008;35(7):509-523.
  • 10. SHETTY, Shilpa, et al. Bruxism: a literature review. The Journal of Indian prosthodontic society. 2010;10:141-148.
  • 11. BASS, Sarah Bauerle, et al. Relationship of Internet health infor-mation use with patient behavior and self-efficacy: experiences of newly diagnosed cancer patients who contact the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service. Journal of health communi-cation. 2006;11(2):219-236.
  • 12. Reuters. Consumer-targeted internet investment: online strategies to improve patient care and product positioning. Reuters Business Insight Report 2003;May.
  • 13. BESSELL, Tracey L.et al. Measuring Prevalence: Prevalence of So-uth Australia's online health seekers. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 2002;26(2):170-173.
  • 14. CHENG, Christina; DUNN, Matthew. Health literacy and the Inter-net: a study on the readability of Australian online health informa-tion. Australian and New Zealand journal of public health. 2015;39(4):309-314.
  • 15. DARAZ, Lubna, et al. Readability of online health information: a meta-narrative systematic review. American Journal of Medical Quality. 2018;33(5):487-492.
  • 16. Ateşman E. Measuring readability in Turkish. AU Tömer Language Journal. 1997;58:171-174.
  • 17. KEMP, Emma, et al. Health literacy, digital health literacy and the implementation of digital health technologies in cancer care: the need for a strategic approach. Health Promotion Journal of Aust-ralia. 2021;32:104-114.
  • 18. CLINE, Rebecca JW; HAYNES, Katie M. Consumer health informa-tion seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health education research. 2001;16(6):671-692.
  • 19. Fox S, Fallows D, editors. Internet health resources, 2003. (26.09.2023) Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/inter-net/2003/07/16/internet-health-resources/.
  • 20. EYSENBACH, Gunther; KÖHLER, Christian. How do consumers se-arch for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. Bmj. 2002;324:573-577.
  • 21. MANCUSO, Josephine M. Health literacy: a concept/dimensional analysis. Nursing & health sciences. 2008;10(3):248-255.
  • 22. World Health Organization (WHO), Division of health promotion, education and communications health education and health pro-motion unit. Health Promotion Glossary. World Health Organiza-tion, Geneva, 1998.
  • 23. YILMAZEL, Gülay; ÇETINKAYA, Fevziye. Sağlık okuryazarlığının top-lum sağlığı açısından önemi. 2016;15(1),69-74.
  • 24. DUBAY, William H. The principles of readability. Online submission, 2004, p:71.
  • 25. ZORBAZ, Kemal. TÜRKÇE DERS KİTAPLARINDAKİ MASALLARIN KE-LİME–CÜMLE UZUNLUKLARI VE OKUNABİLİRLİK DÜZEYLERİ ÜZE-RİNE BİRDEĞERLENDİRME. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama. 2007;3(1):87-101.
  • 26. KLUGMAN, Jeni. Human Development Report 2011. Sustainability and Equity: A better future for all. Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future< for All (November 2, 2011). UNDP-HDRO Human Development Rep<orts. 2011.
  • 27. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, Ulusal Eğitim İstatistikleri 2022. Erişim tarihi: 28.09.2023. Kullanılabilir form: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Ulusal-Egitim-Istatis-tikleri-2022-49756.
  • 28. DEĞIRMENCI, Kübra. Diş Protezi Hakkında Bilgi Sunan Türkçe İn-ternet Sitelerinin Okunabilirlik Düzeylerinin Değerlendirilmesi: Nitel Araştırma. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Dental Sciences. 2022;28(4).
  • 29. AKBULUT, Ayşe Selenge. İnternet ortamındaki şeffaf plak tedavisi ile ilgili bilgilerin okunabilirlik analizi. Necmettin Erbakan Üni-versitesi Diş Hekimliği Dergisi. 2022;4(1):7-11.
  • 30. Kılınç, G., Ateşçi, A. A. Evaluation of Quality and Readability of Online Information on Treatments of Traumatic Dental Injuries. Selçuk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi. 2022;9(1):46-52.

Türkçe Web Sitelerindeki Bruksizm ile İlgili Hasta Bilgilendirme Metinlerinin Okunabilirlik ve İçerik Yönünden Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 177 - 181, 19.08.2024
https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1375278

Öz

Amaç: Teknolojideki gelişmeler ile bireylerin daha önce ulaşamadığı yada bulunması zor olan bilgilere ulaşabilmesi günümüzde artık daha da kolaylaşmıştır . İnternet; bilgiye hızlı ve ucuz bir şekilde erişmenin ve paylaşmanın en geçerli yoludur. Sağlık bilgileri de internette en çok aranan konulardan biridir. Bu çalışmada Türkçe web sitelerindeki bruksizm ile ilgili hasta bilgilendirme metinlerin okunabilirlik ve içerik açısından değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Materyal ve Metod: Metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeyini belirlemek için Ateşman okunabilirlik indeksi kullanılırken, içerik değerlendirmesi bruksizmin tanımı, etiyolojisi, klinik tipleri, tanı ve tedavisi ile ilgili genel sorularla değerlendirilmiştir. Verilerin analizi için SPSS 23 istatistik paket programından yararlanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Çalışma kapsamında 161 web sitesi incelenmiş olup bunlardan 100 tanesi değerlendirmeye alınmıştır. Arama dağılımında özel diş klinikleri (%78,2) daha fazla ön plana çıkmıştır. Yapılan istatiksel analize göre web sitelerinin okunabilirlik verilerinde % 85’inin orta zorlukta, %10’nun zor % 5’inin kolay olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca web sitelerindeki hasta bilgilendirme metinlerinin genelinde; bruksizmin etiyolojisi ve hangi sebeplerle oluştuğu (%62), klinik formları (%68), teşhis (%58) ve tedavisine (%55) yönelik bilgilerin yetersiz olduğu gözlemlenmiştir.
Sonuç: Hasta bilgilendirme metinleri hazırlanırken toplumumuzun sağlık okuryazarlık düzeyi göz önüne alınıp daha kolay okunabilen ve anlaşılır metinler hazırlanmalıdır. Kamu kurumları da bu metinleri internette yayınlanmadan önce denetlemeli, gerekli düzeltmeleri ilgililere iletmeli ve düzeltmeler sonrasında yayınlanmasına izin vermelidir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: bruksizm, internet, okunabilirlik, sağlık bilgisi

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışmada daha önce insanlardan toplanan herhangi bir veri kullanılmadığı için etik kurul onayı alınmamıştır.

Destekleyen Kurum

Yok.

Teşekkür

Yok.

Kaynakça

  • 1. LOBBEZOO, Frank, et al. Bruxism defined and graded: an interna-tional consensus. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2013;40(1):2-4.
  • 2. NIAMTU III, Joseph. Botulinum toxin A: a review of 1,085 oral and maxillofacial patient treatments. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2003;61(3):317-324.
  • 3. BADER, Gaby; LAVIGNE, Gilles. Sleep bruxism; an<<<<< overview of an oromandibular sleep movement disorder. Sleep medicine re-views. 2000;4(1):27-43.
  • 4. TRENOUTH, M. J. The relationship between bruxism and temporo-mandibular joint dysfunction as shown by computer analysis of noc-turnal tooth contact patterns. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 1979;6(1):81-87.
  • 5. DEMJAHA, Genc; KAPUSEVSKA, Biljana; PEJKOVSKA-SHAHPASKA, Budima. Bruxism unconscious oral habit in everyday life. Open ac-cess Macedonian journal of medical sciences. 2019;7(5):876.
  • 6. MASSIGNAN, Carla, et al. Poor sleep quality and prevalence of pro-bable sleep bruxism in primary and mixed dentitions: a cross-sec-tional study. Sleep and Breathing, 2019;23:935-941.
  • 7. SHETTY, Shilpa, et al. Bruxism: a literature review. The Journal of Indian prosthodontic society. 2010;10:141-148.
  • 8. KOYANO, Kiyoshi, et al. Assessment of bruxism in the clinic. Jour-nal of oral rehabilitation. 2008;35(7):495-508.
  • 9. LOBBEZOO, Frank, et al. Principles for the management of bruxism. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2008;35(7):509-523.
  • 10. SHETTY, Shilpa, et al. Bruxism: a literature review. The Journal of Indian prosthodontic society. 2010;10:141-148.
  • 11. BASS, Sarah Bauerle, et al. Relationship of Internet health infor-mation use with patient behavior and self-efficacy: experiences of newly diagnosed cancer patients who contact the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service. Journal of health communi-cation. 2006;11(2):219-236.
  • 12. Reuters. Consumer-targeted internet investment: online strategies to improve patient care and product positioning. Reuters Business Insight Report 2003;May.
  • 13. BESSELL, Tracey L.et al. Measuring Prevalence: Prevalence of So-uth Australia's online health seekers. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 2002;26(2):170-173.
  • 14. CHENG, Christina; DUNN, Matthew. Health literacy and the Inter-net: a study on the readability of Australian online health informa-tion. Australian and New Zealand journal of public health. 2015;39(4):309-314.
  • 15. DARAZ, Lubna, et al. Readability of online health information: a meta-narrative systematic review. American Journal of Medical Quality. 2018;33(5):487-492.
  • 16. Ateşman E. Measuring readability in Turkish. AU Tömer Language Journal. 1997;58:171-174.
  • 17. KEMP, Emma, et al. Health literacy, digital health literacy and the implementation of digital health technologies in cancer care: the need for a strategic approach. Health Promotion Journal of Aust-ralia. 2021;32:104-114.
  • 18. CLINE, Rebecca JW; HAYNES, Katie M. Consumer health informa-tion seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health education research. 2001;16(6):671-692.
  • 19. Fox S, Fallows D, editors. Internet health resources, 2003. (26.09.2023) Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/inter-net/2003/07/16/internet-health-resources/.
  • 20. EYSENBACH, Gunther; KÖHLER, Christian. How do consumers se-arch for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. Bmj. 2002;324:573-577.
  • 21. MANCUSO, Josephine M. Health literacy: a concept/dimensional analysis. Nursing & health sciences. 2008;10(3):248-255.
  • 22. World Health Organization (WHO), Division of health promotion, education and communications health education and health pro-motion unit. Health Promotion Glossary. World Health Organiza-tion, Geneva, 1998.
  • 23. YILMAZEL, Gülay; ÇETINKAYA, Fevziye. Sağlık okuryazarlığının top-lum sağlığı açısından önemi. 2016;15(1),69-74.
  • 24. DUBAY, William H. The principles of readability. Online submission, 2004, p:71.
  • 25. ZORBAZ, Kemal. TÜRKÇE DERS KİTAPLARINDAKİ MASALLARIN KE-LİME–CÜMLE UZUNLUKLARI VE OKUNABİLİRLİK DÜZEYLERİ ÜZE-RİNE BİRDEĞERLENDİRME. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama. 2007;3(1):87-101.
  • 26. KLUGMAN, Jeni. Human Development Report 2011. Sustainability and Equity: A better future for all. Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future< for All (November 2, 2011). UNDP-HDRO Human Development Rep<orts. 2011.
  • 27. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, Ulusal Eğitim İstatistikleri 2022. Erişim tarihi: 28.09.2023. Kullanılabilir form: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Ulusal-Egitim-Istatis-tikleri-2022-49756.
  • 28. DEĞIRMENCI, Kübra. Diş Protezi Hakkında Bilgi Sunan Türkçe İn-ternet Sitelerinin Okunabilirlik Düzeylerinin Değerlendirilmesi: Nitel Araştırma. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Dental Sciences. 2022;28(4).
  • 29. AKBULUT, Ayşe Selenge. İnternet ortamındaki şeffaf plak tedavisi ile ilgili bilgilerin okunabilirlik analizi. Necmettin Erbakan Üni-versitesi Diş Hekimliği Dergisi. 2022;4(1):7-11.
  • 30. Kılınç, G., Ateşçi, A. A. Evaluation of Quality and Readability of Online Information on Treatments of Traumatic Dental Injuries. Selçuk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi. 2022;9(1):46-52.
Toplam 30 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Ağız ve Çene Cerrahisi
Bölüm Araştırma
Yazarlar

Ahmet Aktı 0000-0002-3447-0065

Uğur Dolunay 0000-0003-2150-9124

Gökhan Gürses 0000-0002-3825-4650

Yayımlanma Tarihi 19 Ağustos 2024
Gönderilme Tarihi 12 Ekim 2023
Kabul Tarihi 28 Şubat 2024
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2024 Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

Vancouver Aktı A, Dolunay U, Gürses G. Türkçe Web Sitelerindeki Bruksizm ile İlgili Hasta Bilgilendirme Metinlerinin Okunabilirlik ve İçerik Yönünden Değerlendirilmesi. Selcuk Dent J. 2024;11(2):177-81.