A multimetric health literacy analysis of online gender affirmation surgery materials: From facial to genital surgery.

[BACKGROUND] The transgender patient population is expanding, and gender affirming surgery (GAS) volume is increasing. Accurate, comprehensive, and easily navigable resources on GAS are lacking. We aim to evaluate the readability of online materials for specific gender affirming surgical procedures to identify mechanisms of improving information access for transgender patients.

[MATERIALS AND METHODS] "Facial feminization", "facial masculinization", "MTF breast augmentation", "FTM chest masculinization", "MTF vaginoplasty", "metoidioplasty", and "FTM phalloplasty" were searched on Google. Per keyword, the first 75 text-containing results were included. Text was analyzed for reading difficulty using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading-Ease (FKRE) test and grade level using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) formula, Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Coleman-Liau Index (CLI). Scores were compared using independent t-and ANOVA tests (α = 0.05).

[RESULTS] Mean readability scores (FKRE 37.44) and grade-levels (FKGL 12.87, GFI 15.61, SMOG 11.91, CLI 15.00) correlated with college-level difficulty. Masculinizing surgical materials were more difficult to read than feminizing ones (p ≤ 0.023). Top surgery materials were easier to read than facial and genital surgery materials (p ≤ 0.013). Specifically, chest masculinization resources were more difficult to read than those for breast augmentation (p ≤ 0.006). No differences were found between facial feminization and masculinization surgery resources, nor between resources for different gender affirming genital surgeries.

[CONCLUSION] Online GAS materials are written above the recommended 6th grade reading-level, with resources for transgender men being significantly more challenging to understand. Improving readability of online resources can help overcome barriers to care for the transgender patient population.