HCM 205 Module 7 Project Two Example

Project Two: Say It Plainly, a Front-Desk Guide to Common Clinic Terms

[Student Name]

Southern New Hampshire University

HCM 205: Medical Terminology

Project Two

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.

Project Two: Say It Plainly, a Front-Desk Guide to Common Clinic Terms

Patients often leave the exam room with a word they did not understand and ask the first person they see, usually someone at the front desk. Hillcrest Medical Group's front-desk staff want to help but worry about giving wrong or clinical answers. This project creates a plain-language guide to the terms patients ask about most, with clear limits on what staff should explain and when to refer questions to a nurse.

Why Plain Language Matters

Castro et al. (2007) analyzed audio of diabetes appointments and showed that doctors regularly used technical words without explaining it, and that patients frequently did not understand the unexplained terms. Gotlieb et al. (2022) surveyed members of the public about common medical phrases and found widespread misunderstanding, especially where medical meanings differ from everyday meanings. A patient who hears that a test was negative may think something is wrong, when negative usually means the condition was not found.

Choosing the Terms

For two weeks, the four front-desk staff recorded every medical term patients asked about. Of 146 questions, the twenty most frequent terms accounted for 71%. The most common were test result words such as negative and unremarkable, diagnosis names such as hypertension and osteoarthritis, procedure names such as colonoscopy and echocardiogram and instructions such as NPO and fasting labs.

Principles for the Guide

Five principles guided each entry. Use everyday words and short sentences. Keep the medical meaning accurate even when simplified. Explain what a term means, not what it means for this patient's care, which is the clinician's role. Flag terms where patients often need more than a definition, such as test results, and direct those questions to a nurse. Include a teach-back prompt so staff can check understanding.

Sample Entries

The table shows eight of the twenty entries, each with a plain-language explanation and guidance on when to refer.

Table 1. Sample Entries From the Plain-Language Guide

Note. Entries reviewed for accuracy by the clinic's nurse educator.

Readability Checks

Every entry went through a readability calculator, and wording was trimmed until it landed near a sixth-grade reading level, a common target for patient materials. Readability scores are imperfect, since they measure word and sentence length rather than meaning, so the formula served as a first check rather than the final test. Long words that could not be avoided, such as colonoscopy, were kept but explained immediately. Sentences were limited to one idea each, and every entry began with the plainest version of the meaning before adding detail.

Words Patients Misread Most

The question log showed that the most troublesome words were ordinary words with medical meanings. Negative, positive, unremarkable, impressive, stable and chronic all caused confusion, because patients applied everyday meanings. Stable, for example, can mean the condition is not getting worse, not that it has improved. Chronic means long-lasting, not severe. These entries received extra attention in testing, because a wrong interpretation could cause false reassurance or needless worry. They also became the focus of the staff training session.

Checking Understanding

Explaining a term is not enough if the patient does not understand it. Ha Dinh et al. (2016) systematically reviewed studies of the teach-back method, in which a patient is asked to explain information back in their own words, and found that it improved understanding, adherence and self-management in people with chronic disease in many of the studies reviewed. The guide includes prompts such as I want to be sure my explanation made sense; in your own words, what will you do about food and drink tomorrow morning?

Accuracy Review

Plain language must not become wrong language. The clinic's nurse educator reviewed every entry and changed five. For example, the first draft described osteoarthritis as arthritis from getting older, which the nurse revised because injury and other factors also contribute. The definition of fasting was revised to point staff to the order, since fasting times differ by test.

Testing With Patients

Ten patients in the waiting room, recruited with permission, read five entries each and explained them back. Eight of ten correctly explained every entry they read. Two patients misunderstood unremarkable until the entry added the word normal at the start. Three asked for Spanish versions, which the clinic's certified interpreter translated and reviewed.

Using the Guide at the Desk

The guide is kept at each workstation and in the shared drive. Staff were trained in a thirty-minute session covering the entries, the refer-to-nurse rule and teach-back practice. A simple log records new terms patients ask about so the guide can grow.

Limits and Safeguards

Front-desk staff are not clinicians. The guide explains the general meaning of terms and never interprets a patient's own results, diagnosis or treatment. Questions about what a result means for the patient, symptoms or medications go to a nurse. This boundary protects patients and staff.

Evaluation

After three months, staff will review the log of questions, the number referred to nurses and a short patient survey asking whether explanations were clear. Nurses will report any explanations that caused confusion.

Conclusion

A short, accurate, tested guide helps front-desk staff answer the terminology questions patients bring every day, using plain words, clear limits and teach-back to confirm understanding. It turns the skills of this course into direct help for patients. Staff say they now answer with more confidence.

References

Castro, C. M., Wilson, C., Wang, F., & Schillinger, D. (2007). Babel babble: Physicians' use of unclarified medical jargon with patients. American Journal of Health Behavior, 31(Suppl. 1), S85-S95. https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.31.s1.11

Gotlieb, R., Praska, C., Hendrickson, M. A., Marmet, J., Charpentier, V., Hause, E., Allen, K. A., Lunos, S., & Pitt, M. B. (2022). Accuracy in patient understanding of common medical phrases. JAMA Network Open, 5(11), Article e2242972. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.42972

Ha Dinh, T. T., Bonner, A., Clark, R., Ramsbotham, J., & Hines, S. (2016). The effectiveness of the teach-back method on adherence and self-management in health education for people with chronic disease: A systematic review. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 14(1), 210-247. https://doi.org/10.11124/jbisrir-2016-2296