Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: Observa-se um crescimento da busca de informação no público geral sobre temas médicos na internet, inclusive em anestesiologia. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar a informação existente ao leigo na internet em língua portuguesa sobre analgesia de parto para a população brasileira. Método: Com o uso do termo “anestesia de parto”, os 20 primeiros sites encontrados no Google em novembro de 2014 foram avaliados por dois médicos residentes e classificados como médicos e não médicos. Legibilidade e desenho - acessibilidade, confiabilidade e navegabilidade - foram comparados por meio das ferramentas Fresh (Flesch Reading Ease Score) e Lida (Minervation Validation Tool for Healthcare Websites). O conteúdo dos sites foi confrontado em relação à literatura médica. Resultados: Sites médicos e não médicos foram considerados de difícil leitura de acordo com o Fresh. Em relação ao desenho, não houve diferença entre os grupos quanto à navegabilidade. Entretanto, a acessibilidade foi considerada superior em sites não médicos (p= 0,042); enquanto que a confiabilidade foi maior em sites médicos (p= 0,019). Conclusões: Com aumento da busca de informações em saúde na internet e aumento da preocupação de melhorar a qualidade de assistência ao parto, é fundamental que o conteúdo disponível ao leigo sobre analgesia de parto seja de qualidade e compreendido. Este estudo demonstrou que tanto sites médicos como não médicos são de difícil leitura; e que os sites não médicos são mais acessíveis, enquanto os médicos são mais precisos.

Abstract Background and objectives: It has been observed a general public increased search on the Internet for health information, including Anesthesiology. The objective of this study was to evaluate the information available to the lay person in Portuguese on the Internet about labor analgesia for the Brazilian population. Method: Using the term “labor anesthesia”, the first 20 sites found on Google in November 2014 were evaluated by two resident physicians and classified as medical and non-medical. Legibility and Design - accessibility, reliability and navigability-were compared using Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRESH) and Minervation validation tool for healthcare websites (LIDA) tools. The websites' content was confronted with that of the medical literature. Results: Medical and non-medical websites were considered difficult to read according to FRESH. Regarding the design, there was no difference between groups regarding navigability, however, accessibility was considered superior in non-medical websites (p = 0.042); while reliability was higher in medical websites (p = 0.019). Conclusions: With the increased search for health information on the Internet and concern about improving the quality of childbirth care, it is fundamental that the content available to the layperson about labor analgesia is of quality and well understood. This study demonstrated that both medical and non-medical websites are difficult to read and that non-medical websites are more accessible while the medical ones are more accurate.

BACKGROUND: Measuring the quality of life measure of patients with dermatologic diseases is an important concern. The instruments to evaluate it are commonly originally written in English and need to be translated and validated to be used in different cultures. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to translate and validate the Skindex-29 questionnaire to Brazilian Portuguese to be used in our country as a quality of life assessment instrument in dermatologic patients. METHODS: The first step was the translation from English to Brazilian Portuguese and the back-translation by two native speakers. The translated version was then used for the second step, when three questionnaires were applied to 75 patients (43 of whom were classified as lightly affected and 32 as heavily affected by their dermatologic conditions): an identification questionnaire, the translated version of Skindex-29, and the Brazilian Portuguese version of Dermatologic Life Quality Index (DLQI). Additionally, the generic questionnaire Short Form 36 (SF-36) was applied to 41 of these patients. The last step to evaluate reproducibility was repeating the Skindex-29 questionnaire by the same researcher one week later in 44 patients. RESULTS: Reliability was observed in global Skindex-29 scale (α=0.934), and its domains emotions (α=0.926), symptoms (α=0,702), and psycosocial functioning (α=0.860). The reproducibility showed high intraclass correlations. High intra class correlations was observed, thus validating reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The Skindex-29 quality of life questionnaire was properly translated and validated to Brazilian Portuguese.