Blood glucose monitor quick reference guides: are they suitable for patients?

BACKGROUND The purpose of this study was to assess readability and related characteristics of English-language Quick Reference Guides (QRGs) accompanying home blood glucose monitors (HBGMs), including reading grade level, dimensions, text point size, illustrations, and layout features. METHODS Using the 2006 Diabetes Forecast Resource Guide, we identified HBGMs currently available in the United States. Reading grade level was calculated using Flesch Reading Ease (FRE). Text point size was determined by measuring the distance from the ascent line to the descent line with a C-Thru (Bloomfield, CT) Ruler. Total number of illustrations per QRG was tallied. Illustration dimensions were measured to the nearest millimeter. We also assessed layout features-derived from the Suitability of Materials Assessment and User-Friendliness Tool-including, font style type, use of white space, sentence structure, language style, limited math skill, focus on "Need to Know," and appropriateness of illustrations. RESULTS FRE scores ranged from 5(th) to approximately 13(th) grade, while text point size averaged 9.9 +/- 1.6 (range, 8-12). QRGs averaged 15.8.2 +/- 6.0 (range, 6-25) clear and realistic illustrations, most slightly larger than a quarter. Most QRGs avoided use of specialty fonts (85.7%) and limited information to "Need to Know" (92.9%). All instructions required little math skill; however, ample white space was used in five (35.7%) QRGs. CONCLUSIONS HBGM manufacturers should increase the size of QRG fold-outs, thereby allowing for larger text size and illustrations, and increasing the amount of white space. Making these relatively small formatting changes would ensure that all patients with diabetes, particularly those with visual impairments, are able to follow HBGM instructions.

[1]  W. DeJong,et al.  Literacy demands of product information intended to supplement television direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertisements. , 2004, Patient education and counseling.

[2]  Steven E Roskos,et al.  Readability Characteristics of Consumer Medication Information for Asthma Inhalation Devices , 2006, The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma.

[3]  L. Wallace,et al.  Making sense of home pregnancy test instructions. , 2009, Journal of women's health.

[4]  L. Wallace,et al.  Do instructions for over-the-counter pre-coital female contraceptives promote "perfect use"? , 2009, Contraception.

[5]  Elizabeth G Hill,et al.  The Relationship Between Health Literacy and Diabetes Knowledge and Readiness to Take Health Actions , 2007, The Diabetes educator.

[6]  L. Wallace,et al.  Using a home blood pressure monitor: do accompanying instructional materials meet low literacy guidelines? , 2008, Blood pressure monitoring.

[7]  B. Weiss,et al.  Suitability of written supplemental materials available on the Internet for nonprescription medications. , 2006, American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

[8]  Paul P. Lee,et al.  Readability of Ocular Medication Inserts , 2003, Journal of glaucoma.

[9]  R. Busch,et al.  Precision and accuracy of two blood glucose meters: FreeStyle Flash versus One Touch Ultra. , 2006, American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

[10]  T. Raju Hot Brains: Manipulating Body Heat to Save the Brain , 2006, Pediatrics.

[11]  D. Schillinger,et al.  Association of health literacy with diabetes outcomes. , 2002, JAMA.

[12]  L. G. Doak,et al.  Teaching Patients With Low Literacy Skills , 1985 .

[13]  R. Koopman,et al.  Impact of the population at risk of diabetes on projections of diabetes burden in the United States: an epidemic on the way , 2006, Diabetologia.