Validation of Self-Reported Health Literacy Questions Among Diverse English and Spanish-Speaking Populations

BackgroundLimited health literacy (HL) contributes to poor health outcomes and disparities, and direct measurement is often time-intensive. Self-reported HL questions have not been validated among Spanish-speaking and diverse English-speaking populations.ObjectiveTo evaluate three self-reported questions: 1 "How confident are you filling out medical forms?"; 2 "How often do you have problems learning about your medical condition because of difficulty understanding written information?"; and 3 "How often do you have someone help you read hospital materials?" Answers were based on a 5-point Likert scale.DesignThis was a validation study nested within a trial of diabetes self-management support in the San Francisco Department of Public Health.ParticipantsEnglish and Spanish-speaking adults with type 2 diabetes receiving primary care.MethodsUsing the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (s-TOFHLA) in English and Spanish as the reference, we classified HL as inadequate, marginal, or adequate. We calculated the C-index and test characteristics of the three questions and summative scale compared to the s-TOFHLA and assessed variations in performance by language, race/ethnicity, age, and education.Key resultsOf 296 participants, 48% were Spanish-speaking; 9% were White, non-Hispanic; 47% had inadequate HL and 12% had marginal HL. Overall, 57% reported being confident with forms "somewhat" or less. The "confident with forms" question performed best for detecting inadequate (C-index = 0.82, (0.77-0.87)) and inadequate plus marginal HL (C index = 0.81, (0.76-0.86); p<0.01 for differences from other questions), and performed comparably to the summative scale. The "confident with forms" question and scale also performed best across language, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and age.ConclusionsA single self-reported HL question about confidence with forms and a summative scale of three questions discriminated between Spanish and English speakers with adequate HL and those with inadequate and/or inadequate plus marginal HL. The "confident with forms" question or the summative scale may be useful for estimating HL in clinical research involving Spanish-speaking and English-speaking, chronically-ill, diverse populations

Does implementation matter if comprehension is lacking? A qualitative investigation into perceptions of advance care planning in people with cancer

Purpose: While advance care planning holds promise, uptake is variable and it is unclear how well people engage with or comprehend advance care planning. The objective of this study was to explore how people with cancer comprehended Advance Care Plans and examine how accurately advance care planning documentation represented patient wishes. Methods: This study used a qualitative descriptive design. Data collection comprised interviews and an examination of participants’ existing advance care planning documentation. Participants included those who had any diagnosis of cancer with an advance care plan recorded: Refusal of Treatment Certificate; Statement of Choices; and/or Enduring Power of Attorney (Medical Treatment) at one cancer treatment centre. Results: Fourteen participants were involved in the study. Twelve participants were female (86%). The mean age was 77 (range: 61-91) and participants had completed their advance care planning documentation between 8 and 72 weeks prior to the interview (mean 33 weeks). Three themes were evident from the data: Incomplete advance care planning understanding and confidence; Limited congruence for attitude and documentation; Advance care planning can enable peace of mind. Complete advance care planning understanding was unusual; most participants demonstrated partial comprehension of their own advance care plan, and some indicated very limited understanding. Participants’ attitudes and their written document congruence was limited, but advance care planning was seen as helpful. Conclusions: This study highlighted advance care planning was not a completely accurate representation of patient wishes. There is opportunity to improve how patients comprehend their own advance care planning documentation

A Research Agenda for Communication Between Health Care Professionals and Patients Living With Serious Illness

Importance Poor communication by health care professionals contributes to physical and psychological suffering in patients living with serious illness. Patients may not fully understand their illness, prognosis, and treatment options or may not receive medical care consistent with their goals. Despite considerable research exploring the role of communication in this setting, many questions remain, and a clear agenda for communication research is lacking. Observations Through a consensus conference and subsequent activities, we reviewed the state of the science, identified key evidence gaps in understanding the impact of communication on patient outcomes, and created an agenda for future research. We considered 7 broad topics: shared decision making, advance care planning, communication training, measuring communication, communication about prognosis, emotion and serious illness communication, and cultural issues. We identified 5 areas in which further research could substantially move the field forward and help enhance patient care: measurement and methodology, including how to determine communication quality; mechanisms of communication, such as identifying the specific clinician behaviors that patients experience as both honest and compassionate, or the role of bias in the clinical encounter; alternative approaches to advance care planning that focus on the quality of serious illness communication and not simply completion of forms; teaching and disseminating communication skills; and approaches, such as economic incentives and other clinician motivators, to change communication behavior. Conclusions Our findings highlight the urgent need to improve quality of communication between health care professionals and patients living with serious illness through a broad range of research that covers communication skills, tools, patient education, and models of care

Migrant participation in Norwegian health care. A qualitative study using key informants

Background Little is known about how migrants adapt to first-world public health systems. In Norway, patients are assigned a registered general practitioner (RGP) to provide basic care and serve as gatekeeper for other medical services. Objectives: To explore determinants of migrant compliance with the RGP scheme and obstacles that migrants may experience. Methods: Individuals in leadership positions within migrant organizations for the 13 largest migrant populations in Norway in 2008 participated in this qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews, with migrants serving as key informants, were used to elucidate possible challenges migrant patients face in navigating the local primary health-care system. Conversations were structured using an interview guide covering the range of challenges that migrant patients meet in the health-care system. Results: According to informants, integration into the RGP scheme and adequacy of patient-physician communication varies according to duration of stay in Norway, the patient's country of origin, the reason for migration, health literacy, intention to establish permanent residence in Norway, language proficiency, and comprehension of information received about the health system. Informants noted as obstacles: doctor-patient interaction patterns, conflicting ideas about the role of the doctor, and language and cultural differences. In addressing noted obstacles, one strategy would be to combine direct intervention by migrant associations with indirect intervention via the public-health system

The association of health literacy with adherence in older 2 adults, and its role in interventions: a systematic meta-review

Background: Low health literacy is a common problem among older adults. It is often suggested to be associated with poor adherence. This suggested association implies a need for effective adherence interventions in low health literate people. However, previous reviews show mixed results on the association between low health literacy and poor adherence. A systematic meta-review of systematic reviews was conducted to study the association between health literacy and adherence in adults above the age of 50. Evidence for the effectiveness of adherence interventions among adults in this older age group with low health literacy was also explored. Methods: Eight electronic databases (MEDLINE, ERIC, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, DARE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge) were searched using a variety of keywords regarding health literacy and adherence. Additionally, references of identified articles were checked. Systematic reviews were included if they assessed the association between health literacy and adherence or evaluated the effectiveness of interventions to improve adherence in adults with low health literacy. The AMSTAR tool was used to assess the quality of the included reviews. The selection procedure, data-extraction, and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Seventeen reviews were selected for inclusion. Results: Reviews varied widely in quality. Both reviews of high and low quality found only weak or mixed associations between health literacy and adherence among older adults. Reviews report on seven studies that assess the effectiveness of adherence interventions among low health literate older adults. The results suggest that some adherence interventions are effective for this group. The interventions described in the reviews focused mainly on education and on lowering the health literacy demands of adherence instructions. No conclusions could be drawn about which type of intervention could be most beneficial for this population. Conclusions: Evidence on the association between health literacy and adherence in older adults is relatively weak. Adherence interventions are potentially effective for the vulnerable population of older adults with low levels of health literacy, but the evidence on this topic is limited. Further research is needed on the association between health literacy and general health behavior, and on the effectiveness of interventions

A qualitative study of health care professionals' views and experiences of paediatric advance care planning

Background Good end-of-life care planning is vital to ensure optimal care is provided for patients and their families. Two key factors are open and honest advance care planning conversations between the patient (where possible), family, and health care professionals, focusing on exploring what their future wishes are; and the development of an advance care plan document. However, in paediatric and neonatal settings, there has been little research to demonstrate how advance care planning conversations take place. This study explored health care professionals’ views and experiences of paediatric advance care planning in hospitals, community settings and hospices. MethodsA qualitative methodology was employed using purposive sampling of health care professionals involved in the end-of-life care for children aged 0–18 years known to the hospital palliative care team, and had died at least three months before, but less than 18 months prior to the study. Ethics committee approval was obtained for the study. Located in the North of England, the study involved three hospitals, a children’s hospice, and community services. Data were collected using semi-structured, digitally recorded, telephone interviews. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis. ResultsTwenty-one health care professionals participated, including generalist paediatric staff as well as specialist palliative care staff.Two themes were generated from the study: The timing of planning conversations, including waiting for the relationship with the family to form; the introduction of parallel planning; avoiding a crisis situation. Secondly, supporting effective conversations around advance care planning, including where to have the conversation; introducing the conversation; and how to approach the topic encompassing the value of advance care planning and documentation for families. Conclusion The timing of when to start the advance care planning conversations remains an issue for health care professionals. The value of doing it in stages and considering the environment where the conversations are held was noted. Timely planning was seen as vital to avoid difficult conversations at a crisis point and for co-ordination of care. Good advance care planning is to provide the best person-centred care for the child and experience for the family

Beyond literacy and numeracy in patient provider communication: Focus groups suggest roles for empowerment, provider attitude and language

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although the number of people living in the United States with limited English proficiency (LEP) is substantial, the impact of language on patients' experience of provider-patient communication has been little explored.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a series of 12 exploratory focus groups in English, Spanish and Cantonese to elicit discussion about patient-provider communication, particularly with respect to the concerns of the health literacy framework, i.e. ability to accurately understand, interpret and apply information given by providers. Within each language, 2 groups had high education and 2 had low education participants to partially account for literacy levels, which cannot be assessed consistently across three languages. Eighty-five (85) adults enrolled in the focus groups. The resulting video tapes were transcribed, translated and analyzed via content analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified 5 themes: 1) language discordant communication; 2) language concordant communication; 3) empowerment; 4) providers' attitudes; 5) issues with the health care system. Despite efforts by facilitators to elicit responses related to cognitive understanding, issues of interpersonal process were more salient, and respondents did not readily separate issues of accurate understanding from their overall narratives of experience with health care and illness. Thematic codes often appeared to be associated with education level, language and/or culture.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our most salient finding was that for most of our participants there was no clear demarcation between literacy and numeracy, language interpretation, health communication, interpersonal relations with their provider and the rest of their experience with the health care system.</p