Search

This paper discusses the implications of health literacy during the COVID-19 pandemic for adults with lower literacy skills. It highlights the challenges faced by individuals in understanding complex health information and emphasizes the role of adult educators in providing trustworthy and comprehensible health information. Incorporating health literacy into adult education programs has shown positive impacts on students' self-efficacy and health knowledge. Overall, improving health literacy in the ABE classroom can empower individuals to make informed health decisions.

In the United States, worker health care is funded through health insurance plans paid for by employers. Insurance plans are written in complicated language that low wage earners (LWE), who have lower levels of education, may find difficult to understand. We examined the relationship between health insurance literacy (HIL), education, and literacy skills for 75 LWE. Results indicated low to moderate associations between literacies (reading, numeracy, digital), educational attainment and HIL; in a multiple regression analysis, only reading was uniquely significant. LWE with low educational attainment and poor reading skills may need additional support to understand and use their health insurance.

Background: Research suggests that younger adult African American people (age 18–35 years) have more than double the risk of having a stroke than White people. Stroke risk education is lacking for this cohort; there is a dearth of materials that are targeted and focused for young adult African Americans. There is also little research on developing and testing age and culturally appropriate health literate materials that may help this population better understand personal risk factors for stroke. Objective: The aim of this study was to understand factors to guide creating and disseminating plain language health messages about stroke risk awareness among young adult African Americans. Methods: African American participants age 18 years and older completed an online survey (N = 413). Descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance, and two-step cluster analyses were used to evaluate stroke risk awareness, perceived risk of stroke, message creation factors, and online health information seeking behavior. Open-ended survey items described modifiable and non-modifiable reasons for perceived risk of stroke. Key Results: Participants reported differences on overall stroke risk factor awareness by perceived risk of stroke was significant (F[2, 409] = 4.91, p =.008) with the very low/low group (M = 1.66, p <.01), showing significantly lower overall stroke risk factor awareness compared to the moderate and high/very high groups. Both respondents who thought their stroke risk was very low/low and moderate/high/very high commented about family history (54.1% and 45.9%, respectively) as the reason and 88.2% of very low/low commented that they did not have risk factors for stroke because they were young. Cluster analysis indicated the Mostly Clear Preferences cluster was more likely to select mostly/very on positive, informational, and long-term messages and medical authority sources. The largest of three clusters reported medical sources as the highest rated source for both finding and trusting health information (47.2%, n = 195). Conclusion: Young adult African Americans have a scarce understanding of modifiable stroke risk factors; health education materials should focus on positive information messaging that shows a long-term result and is presented by a medical authority. We did not observe any age or sex differences among the data, which suggests different message modalities may not be needed. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2024;8(1):e38–e46.] Plain Language Summary: In this study, we collected data to create a targeted stroke risk awareness health education video for young African American adults (age 18 years and older). The video was based on analysis of data from 413 participants focusing on perception of stroke risk, stroke risk knowledge, as well as preference for message type, source credibility, and modality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multimedia videos are important tools to inform uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Video design using health literacy guidelines may help optimize video usefulness. Many health organizations (HO) (provides information) and health care (HCO) (provides direct health care) organizations have used YouTube to deliver videos about COVID-19 vaccines. Objective: We examined HO and HCO COVID-19 vaccine videos shown on YouTube for health literacy guidelines (quality, understandability and actionability). Methods: The top 30 most viewed COVID-19 vaccine videos posted by HO and HCO were analyzed using the Global Quality Score (GQS) and the Patient Education Assessment Tool for evaluating audiovisual formats (PEMAT-AV). Key Results: GQS scores averaged 3.12 (standard deviation [SD].789), which is equivalent to 80%. Using PEMATAV, there was a relationship between actionability and quality (r(28) =.453, p <.05) for HO; for HCO, there was a relationship between usability and quality (r(28) =.455, p <.05). Odds ratio analysis showed quality in HO leading to higher odds of actionability (3.573, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.480–14.569]) and quality in HCO videos leading to higher understandability (4.093, CI [1.203–17.865]). Conclusion: Few organizations applied all health literacy principles to video design. Video creation for mass media health campaigns by HO and HCO should include consideration of evidence-based health literacy measures (quality, understandability, actionability) to ensure intended results across viewers with different health literacy levels including communities who have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2023;7(2):e111–e118.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Respiratory therapists (RTs) should communicate with patients in a way that leads to patients understanding their discharge plans and medical device instructions. The teach-back method is a patient-centered, health-literate technique that allows health care professionals to confirm patient understanding. The purpose of this mixed-methods pilot study was to measure the use of teach-back by first-year undergraduate RT students in a simulation-center experience after a 1-h teach-back skills training. METHODS: First-year RT students' health literacy knowledge and belief in communication skills were measured using a pre- and post- survey about their knowledge and beliefs. A 1-h health literacy and teach-back skills training lecture (ie, intervention) was delivered after the pre-testing. RT students were then assessed for teach-back use during a regularly scheduled simulation center experience. Their experiences were recorded in a semistructured interview immediately after the simulation-center experience. RESULTS: 14 of 20 RT students used teach-back in the simulation center. Knowledge scores increased from 8.278 to 8.944 postintervention, and the median scores for belief increased from 111 to 117 postintervention. There was a statistically significant postintervention increase in knowledge scores (P < .001) and in communication belief scores (P = .038). Thematic content analysis revealed 2 primary themes for teach-back use: to confirm patient understanding and to confirm proper use of medical devices. Teach-back was not used due to the discharge scenario used in the simulation center, due to the student forgetting and/or being nervous, due to how engaged the patient was, or due to individual communication style. CONCLUSIONS: Results from our pilot study indicate that RT students may benefit from a 1-h health literacy and teach-back skills training. Furthermore, we identified reasons why the teach-back method was not used and determined what communication training students perceived would be helpful. Our findings can be used to help improve and implement communication skills training in the RT curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: How individuals perceive their health literacy may differ based on demographic and individual characteristics., Objective: The purpose of this study was to understand the dispersion of health literacy across demographics in the state of Georgia in 2021 and to determine which factors influence health literacy., Methods: Study participants were age 18 years and older and completed an on-line Health Literacy Questionnaire ( N = 520). The participant pool was stratified to mirror state-wide demographics of geography and race. Results were further collapsed into composite scales reflecting basic, communicative, and critical health literacy. Descriptive statistics, bivariate Pearson's correlations, and multiple regression analyses were used. A two-step cluster analysis was performed with the nine health literacy scales., Key Results: Rural county and no health insurance were negatively related to all three composite scales ( rs = .093-.254, ps < .05). Demographic predictors accounted for 6.7% of the variance in basic (F[6, 439] = 5.287, p < .001), 10% in communicative (F[6, 438] = 8.154, p < .001), and 6% for critical (F[6, 439] = 4.675, p < .0010. In all scales, health insurance status was the strongest primary unique predictor ( βs = .236, .295, .181, ps <.05, respectively). In a two-step cluster analysis only health insurance status differentiated the health literacy level clusters ( X 2 (3) = 9.43, 34.51, ps = 024, <.001 respectively)., Conclusion: Lacking health insurance is the most consistent and largest contributor to low health literacy across the state of Georgia; population demographics are not. Health literacy policies and practices should be developed for universal application and not focus on specific populations. [ HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice . 2022;6(3):e182-e190. ] Plain Language Summary: In this study, demographics that are usually associated with low health literacy like age, sex, race, educational attainment, and type of county (rural or urban) were not associated with; the only significant factor was lack of health insurance. This relationship strengthens the case for universal health literacy precautions that go beyond population demographics.

Intercultural competence (ICC) and health literacy (HL) are vital components of patient education. The purpose of this study was to determine if an educational intervention that combined ICC and HL was effective at changing second-year nursing students' self-efficacy, beliefs, and knowledge. A total of 157 second-year nursing students in two different programs participated in pre- and post-surveys consisting of the Transcultural Self-Efficacy Tool and Health Literacy Beliefs and Knowledge survey. Students attended a two-part lecture with a moderated panel on ICC and health literacy and began clinical fieldwork. Results were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Pearson correlation. There was a statistically significant difference in all ICC subscales after an educational intervention and clinical fieldwork (cognitive z = 7.681, p < .001; practical z = 7.319, p < .001; affective z = 6.533, p < .001). HL knowledge and belief measures showed statistically significant difference after the intervention ( z = 3.037, p < .001). There was a statistically significant correlation between intercultural self-efficacy and HL beliefs (Pearson's r = .486, p < .001). Self-efficacy in ICC and beliefs and knowledge in HL increased over time for nursing students, indicating that it may be beneficial to train students about these two constructs simultaneously. [ HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice . 2021;5(4):e283-e286.] .

Abstract: For nurses to communicate effectively, they must understand how patients obtain, understand, and use health information to make health decisions, that is, their health literacy (HL) level. A gap in teaching HL communication skills exists in nursing curricula. This study explored nursing students' knowledge and beliefs about HL communication before and after an HL training. Analysis revealed a significant increase in knowledge after training (Mpre = 9.00, Mpost = 9.89), t(36) = 3.75, p < .001. Participants (84.6 percent) used teach-back technique with simulated patients and identified additional training as an aid to skill building., Competing Interests: The authors have declared no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 National League for Nursing.)

Background: There are 3 million refugees living in the United States today whose health and wellbeing may be diminished by not being able to understand and use health information. Little is known about these barriers to health in multiethnic refugee communities., Objective: This present study examined (1) the relationship between English proficiency, health literacy, length of time in the US, and health status; and (2) differences in poor health status caused by limited English proficiency and low health literacy individually and in combination to better understand which barriers might be addressed by improving refugee health., Methods: Refugees (N = 136) age 18 to 65 years were recruited using health clinics and refugee resettlement agencies. Survey questions included demographics, health status, health literacy, English language proficiency, social determinants of health, and barriers to getting health care. Interpreters were used as necessary. We used a cross-sectional study with purposeful sampling., Key Results: There is a high correlation (Pearson's r = 0.77) between health literacy and English proficiency; they were moderately correlated with health status (r = 0.40 and 0.37, respectively). Length of time in the US only modestly correlated with health status (r = 0.16). Health literacy and English proficiency taken individually were strong predictors of health status (health literacy odds ratio [OR] = 4.0; 95% confidence interval [1.6-9.9], English proficiency OR = 3.6, confidence interval [1.5-9.0]) but not significant. Their interaction, however, was significant and accounted for most of the effect (log odds for interaction = 1.67, OR = 5.1, p < .05)., Conclusions: English proficiency and health literacy individually and in combination facilitate poor health and present health-related barriers for refugees. Length of time in the US for refugees may not correlate with health status despite studies that suggest a change in health over time for the larger immigrant population. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2020;4(4):e230-e236.] PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The combined effects of limited English proficiency and low health literacy can create significant barriers to good health outcomes in refugee populations. Length of time in the US for refugees may not correlate with health status despite studies that suggest a change in health over time for the larger immigrant population., (© 2020 Feinberg, O'Connor, Owen-Smith, et al.; licensee SLACK Incorporated.)

Background: Respiratory therapists (RTs) should communicate with patients in a way that leads to patients understanding their discharge plans and medical device instructions. The teach-back method is a patient-centered, health-literate technique that allows health care professionals to confirm patient understanding. The purpose of this mixed-methods pilot study was to measure the use of teach-back by first-year undergraduate RT students in a simulation-center experience after a 1-h teach-back skills training., Methods: First-year RT students' health literacy knowledge and belief in communication skills were measured using a pre- and post- survey about their knowledge and beliefs. A 1-h health literacy and teach-back skills training lecture (ie, intervention) was delivered after the pre-testing. RT students were then assessed for teach-back use during a regularly scheduled simulation center experience. Their experiences were recorded in a semistructured interview immediately after the simulation-center experience., Results: 14 of 20 RT students used teach-back in the simulation center. Knowledge scores increased from 8.278 to 8.944 postintervention, and the median scores for belief increased from 111 to 117 postintervention. There was a statistically significant postintervention increase in knowledge scores ( P < .001) and in communication belief scores ( P = .038). Thematic content analysis revealed 2 primary themes for teach-back use: to confirm patient understanding and to confirm proper use of medical devices. Teach-back was not used due to the discharge scenario used in the simulation center, due to the student forgetting and/or being nervous, due to how engaged the patient was, or due to individual communication style., Conclusions: Results from our pilot study indicate that RT students may benefit from a 1-h health literacy and teach-back skills training. Furthermore, we identified reasons why the teach-back method was not used and determined what communication training students perceived would be helpful. Our findings can be used to help improve and implement communication skills training in the RT curriculum., Competing Interests: Dr Zimmerman presented a version of this paper at the Open Forum of the 2019 AARC Congress, held November 9-12, 2019 in New Orleans, LA. The authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 by Daedalus Enterprises.)

Background: Health care providers (HCPs) may ask patients if they understand their diagnosis or instructions during clinic visits; patients often simply say yes. However, many patients leave with little idea of their medication and discharge instructions. Teach Back (TB) is a patient-centered health-literate technique that allows HCPs to confirm patient understanding during clinic visits., Objective: The purpose of this pilot study was to determine a relationship between perception and actual use of TB by medical residents in primary care outpatient clinics (providers, N = 16; clinic visits, N = 80) and, if the observed rate of TB was discordant with perception, did a TB skills training intervention have any impact on use of TB (clinic visit, N = 78). We were also interested in language used during TB and if use of TB was related to patient demographics or health literacy level., Methods: Medical residents' perception was measured using the "Always Use Teach-Back Confidence and Conviction Scale" ( N = 16). Clinic visits were audiotaped and scored for use of TB (pre-intervention, N = 80; post-intervention, N =78). The intervention was a 1-hour TB skills training course. Content analysis was performed to understand the use of TB language., Key Results: Despite the high level of confidence/conviction about TB ( r [16] = .669, p <. 05) TB was only used twice out of 80 visits during pre-intervention clinic visits. During post-intervention, use of TB increased to 41 times by 10 residents (c2[1, N = 16] = 6.533, p <. 05). TB language after the intervention was more collaborative; there was a relationship between gender and use of TB., Conclusion: Results from our pilot study identified three important observations that may be critical to improving health-literate physician communication: residents believe they are using TB in the clinic for many patients; use of TB was discordantly low at 2.5%; and a single 1-hour skills training intervention dramatically increased TB use to 53%. Residents used patient-centered TB language after the training intervention. [ HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice . 2019;3(2):e117-e126.] ., Plain Language Summary: Medical residents believe they are using Teach Back to confirm patient understanding in the clinic 60% of the time when they actually used Teach Back only 2.5% of the time. After an educational intervention, they used Teach Back 53% of the time; Teach-Back language was collaborative and patient-centered, and all but two patients confirmed their medication and discharge plan.