Comparison of a one-time educational intervention to a teach-to-goal educational intervention for self-management of heart failure: design of a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Heart failure (HF) is common, costly and associated with significant morbidity and poor quality of life, particularly for patients with low socioeconomic status. Self-management training has been shown to reduce HF related morbidity and hospitalization rates, but there is uncertainty about how best to deliver such training and what patients benefit. This study compares a single session self-management HF training program against a multiple session training intervention and examines whether their effects differ by literacy level.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>In this randomized controlled multi-site trial, English and Spanish-speaking patients are recruited from university-affiliated General Internal Medicine and Cardiology clinics at 4 sites across the United States. Eligible patients have HF with New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms and are prescribed a loop diuretic. Baseline data, including literacy level, are collected at enrollment and follow-up surveys are conducted at 1, 6 and 12 months</p> <p>Upon enrollment, both the control and intervention groups receive the same 40 minute, literacy-sensitive, in-person, HF education session covering the 4 key self-management components of daily self assessment and having a plan, salt avoidance, exercise, and medication adherence. All participants also receive a literacy-sensitive workbook and a digital bathroom scale. After the baseline education was completed, patients are randomly allocated to return to usual care or to receive ongoing education and training. The intervention group receives an additional 20 minutes of education on weight and symptom-based diuretic self-adjustment, as well as periodic follow-up phone calls from the educator over the course of 1 year. These phone calls are designed to reinforce the education, assess participant knowledge of the education and address barriers to success.</p> <p>The primary outcome is the combined incidence of all cause hospitalization and death. Secondary outcomes include HF-related quality of life, HF-related hospitalizations, knowledge regarding HF, self-care behavior, and self-efficacy. The effects of each intervention will be stratified by patient literacy, in order to identify any differential effects.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Enrollment of the proposed 660 subjects will continue through the end of 2009. Outcome assessments are projected to be completed by early 2011.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov <url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/</url> NCT00378950</p

A heart failure self-management program for patients of all literacy levels: A randomized, controlled trial [ISRCTN11535170]

BACKGROUND: Self-management programs for patients with heart failure can reduce hospitalizations and mortality. However, no programs have analyzed their usefulness for patients with low literacy. We compared the efficacy of a heart failure self-management program designed for patients with low literacy versus usual care. METHODS: We performed a 12-month randomized controlled trial. From November 2001 to April 2003, we enrolled participants aged 30–80, who had heart failure and took furosemide. Intervention patients received education on self-care emphasizing daily weight measurement, diuretic dose self-adjustment, and symptom recognition and response. Picture-based educational materials, a digital scale, and scheduled telephone follow-up were provided to reinforce adherence. Control patients received a generic heart failure brochure and usual care. Primary outcomes were combined hospitalization or death, and heart failure-related quality of life. RESULTS: 123 patients (64 control, 59 intervention) participated; 41% had inadequate literacy. Patients in the intervention group had a lower rate of hospitalization or death (crude incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.69; CI 0.4, 1.2; adjusted IRR = 0.53; CI 0.32, 0.89). This difference was larger for patients with low literacy (IRR = 0.39; CI 0.16, 0.91) than for higher literacy (IRR = 0.56; CI 0.3, 1.04), but the interaction was not statistically significant. At 12 months, more patients in the intervention group reported monitoring weights daily (79% vs. 29%, p < 0.0001). After adjusting for baseline demographic and treatment differences, we found no difference in heart failure-related quality of life at 12 months (difference = -2; CI -5, +9). CONCLUSION: A primary care-based heart failure self-management program designed for patients with low literacy reduces the risk of hospitalizations or death

Relationship of literacy and heart failure in adults with diabetes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although reading ability may impact educational strategies and management of heart failure (HF), the prevalence of limited literacy in patients with HF is unknown.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Subjects were drawn from the Vermont Diabetes Information System Field Survey, a cross-sectional study of adults with diabetes in primary care. Participants' self-reported characteristics were subjected to logistic regression to estimate the association of heart failure and literacy while controlling for social and economic factors. The Short Test of Functional Health Literacy was used to measure literacy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 172 subjects with HF and diabetes, 27% had limited literacy compared to 15% of 826 subjects without HF (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.39, 3.02; <it>P </it>< 0.001). Adjusting for age, sex, race, income, marital status and health insurance, HF continued to be significantly associated with limited literacy (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.00, 2.41, <it>P </it>= .05).</p> <p>After adjusting for education, however, HF was no longer independently associated with literacy (OR 1.31; 95% CI 0.82 – 2.08; <it>P </it>= 0.26).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Over one quarter of diabetic adults with HF have limited literacy. Although this association is no longer statistically significant when adjusted for education, clinicians should be aware that many of their patients have important limitations in dealing with written materials.</p

Do Interventions Designed to Support Shared Decision-Making Reduce Health Inequalities? : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Copyright: © 2014 Durand et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Background: Increasing patient engagement in healthcare has become a health policy priority. However, there has been concern that promoting supported shared decision-making could increase health inequalities. Objective: To evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on disadvantaged groups and health inequalities. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies.Peer reviewe

Literacy and blood pressure – do healthcare systems influence this relationship? A cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Limited literacy is common among patients with chronic conditions and is associated with poor health outcomes. We sought to determine the association between literacy and blood pressure in primary care patients with hypertension and to determine if this relationship was consistent across distinct systems of healthcare delivery.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a cross-sectional study of 1224 patients with hypertension utilizing baseline data from two separate, but similar randomized controlled trials. Patients were enrolled from primary care clinics in the Veterans Affairs healthcare system (VAHS) and a university healthcare system (UHS) in Durham, North Carolina. We compared the association between literacy and the primary outcome systolic blood pressure (SBP) and secondary outcomes of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and blood pressure (BP) control across the two different healthcare systems.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patients who read below a 9^thgrade level comprised 38.4% of patients in the VAHS and 27.5% of the patients in the UHS. There was a significant interaction between literacy and healthcare system for SBP. In adjusted analyses, SBP for patients with limited literacy was 1.2 mmHg lower than patients with adequate literacy in the VAHS (95% CI, -4.8 to 2.3), but 6.1 mmHg higher than patients with adequate literacy in the UHS (95% CI, 2.1 to 10.1); (p = 0.003 for test of interaction). This literacy by healthcare system interaction was not statistically significant for DBP or BP control.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The relationship between patient literacy and systolic blood pressure varied significantly across different models of healthcare delivery. The attributes of the healthcare delivery system may influence the relationship between literacy and health outcomes.</p

Development and validation of the Diabetes Numeracy Test (DNT)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low literacy and numeracy skills are common. Adequate numeracy skills are crucial in the management of diabetes. Diabetes patients use numeracy skills to interpret glucose meters, administer medications, follow dietary guidelines and other tasks. Existing literacy scales may not be adequate to assess numeracy skills. This paper describes the development and psychometric properties of the Diabetes Numeracy Test (DNT), the first scale to specifically measure numeracy skills used in diabetes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The items of the DNT were developed by an expert panel and refined using cognitive response interviews with potential respondents. The final version of the DNT (43 items) and other relevant measures were administered to a convenience sample of 398 patients with diabetes. Internal reliability was determined by the Kuder-Richardson coefficient (KR-20). An <it>a priori </it>hypothetical model was developed to determine construct validity. A shortened 15-item version, the DNT15, was created through split sample analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The DNT had excellent internal reliability (KR-20 = 0.95). The DNT was significantly correlated (p < 0.05) with education, income, literacy and math skills, and diabetes knowledge, supporting excellent construct validity. The mean score on the DNT was 61% and took an average of 33 minutes to complete. The DNT15 also had good internal reliability (KR-20 = 0.90 and 0.89). In split sample analysis, correlations of the DNT-15 with the full DNT in both sub-samples was high (rho = 0.96 and 0.97, respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The DNT is a reliable and valid measure of diabetes related numeracy skills. An equally adequate but more time-efficient version of the DNT, the DNT15, can be used for research and clinical purposes to evaluate diabetes related numeracy.</p

Supporting patients with low health literacy: what role do radiation therapists play?

Purpose: Health literacy plays a key role in a patient’s ability to use health information and services, and can affect health outcomes. This study aimed to explore radiation therapists’ perspectives on how they support people with lower health literacy who are undergoing radiotherapy. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 radiation therapists working in radiation oncology departments in New South Wales, Australia. Results: The four key themes were (1) the process of identifying a patient with low health literacy, (2) the perceived consequences of low health literacy, (3) managing and responding to the needs of different health literacy groups and (4) recommendations to address low health literacy in radiotherapy. Radiation therapists appeared to make an informal, intuitive judgment about a patient’s health literacy, using a variety of verbal and non-verbal cues as well as impromptu conversations with the multi-disciplinary team. Patients perceived to have lower health literacy were described as having greater difficulties assimilating knowledge and engaging in self-care. Although participants reported communicating to patients at a basic level initially, they subsequently tailored their communication to match a patient’s health literacy. Strategies reported to communicate to low health literacy groups ranged from using lay language with minimal medical terminology, using visual aids (photos), using analogies, reiterating information and asking family members with higher literacy to attend consultations. Conclusion: A more structured approach to supporting patients with low health literacy and integrating health literacy training in radiation oncology departments may help to minimise the adverse outcomes typically experienced by this population

Relationship Between Literacy, Knowledge, Self-Care Behaviors, and Heart Failure-Related Quality of Life Among Patients With Heart Failure

ABSTRACTBACKGROUNDWe sought to examine the relationship between literacy and heart failure-related quality of life (HFQOL), and to explore whether literacy-related differences in knowledge, self-efficacy and/or self-care behavior explained the relationship.METHODSWe recruited patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) from four academic medical centers. Patients completed the short version of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (TOFHLA) and questions on HF-related knowledge, HF-related self-efficacy, and self-care behaviors. We assessed HFQOL with the Heart Failure Symptom Scale (HFSS) (range 0–100), with higher scores denoting better quality of life. We used bivariate (t-tests and chi-square) and multivariate linear regression analyses to estimate the associations between literacy and HF knowledge, self-efficacy, self-care behaviors, and HFQOL, controlling for demographic characteristics. Structural equation modeling was conducted to assess whether general HF knowledge, salt knowledge, self-care behaviors, and self-efficacy mediated the relationship between literacy and HFQOL.RESULTSWe enrolled 605 patients with mean age of 60.7years; 52% were male; 38% were African-American and 16% Latino; 26% had less than a high school education; and 67% had annual incomes under $25,000. Overall, 37% had low literacy (marginal or inadequate on TOFHLA). Patients with adequate literacy had higher general HF knowledge than those with low literacy (mean 6.6 vs. 5.5, adjusted difference 0.63, p < 0.01), higher self-efficacy (5.0 vs. 4.1 ,adjusted difference 0.99, p < 0.01), and higher prevalence of key self-care behaviors (p < 0.001). Those with adequate literacy had better HFQOL scores compared to those with low literacy (63.9 vs. 55.4, adjusted difference 7.20, p < 0.01), but differences in knowledge, self-efficacy, and self-care did not mediate this difference in HFQOL.CONCLUSIONLow literacy was associated with worse HFQOL and lower HF-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and self-care behaviors, but differences in knowledge, self-efficacy and self-care did not explain the relationship between low literacy and worse HFQOL

A primary care, multi-disciplinary disease management program for opioid-treated patients with chronic non-cancer pain and a high burden of psychiatric comorbidity

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-cancer pain is a common problem that is often accompanied by psychiatric comorbidity and disability. The effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary pain management program was tested in a 3 month before and after trial. METHODS: Providers in an academic general medicine clinic referred patients with chronic non-cancer pain for participation in a program that combined the skills of internists, clinical pharmacists, and a psychiatrist. Patients were either receiving opioids or being considered for opioid therapy. The intervention consisted of structured clinical assessments, monthly follow-up, pain contracts, medication titration, and psychiatric consultation. Pain, mood, and function were assessed at baseline and 3 months using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale scale (CESD) and the Pain Disability Index (PDI). Patients were monitored for substance misuse. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were enrolled. Mean age was 51 years, 60% were male, 78% were Caucasian, and 93% were receiving opioids. Baseline average pain was 6.5 on an 11 point scale. The average CESD score was 24.0, and the mean PDI score was 47.0. Sixty-three patients (73%) completed 3 month follow-up. Fifteen withdrew from the program after identification of substance misuse. Among those completing 3 month follow-up, the average pain score improved to 5.5 (p = 0.003). The mean PDI score improved to 39.3 (p < 0.001). Mean CESD score was reduced to 18.0 (p < 0.001), and the proportion of depressed patients fell from 79% to 54% (p = 0.003). Substance misuse was identified in 27 patients (32%). CONCLUSIONS: A primary care disease management program improved pain, depression, and disability scores over three months in a cohort of opioid-treated patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Substance misuse and depression were common, and many patients who had substance misuse identified left the program when they were no longer prescribed opioids. Effective care of patients with chronic pain should include rigorous assessment and treatment of these comorbid disorders and intensive efforts to insure follow up