Dataset Information

Implementing routine health literacy assessment in hospital and primary care patients.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Patients with inadequate health literacy often have poorer health outcomes and increased utilization and costs. The Institute of Medicine has recommended that health literacy assessment be incorporated into health care information systems, which would facilitate large-scale studies of the effects of health literacy, as well as evaluation of system interventions to improve care by addressing health literacy. As part of the Health Literacy Screening (HEALS) study, a Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS) was incorporated into the electronic health record (EHR) at a large academic medical center. METHODS:Changes were implemented to the nursing intake documentation across all adult hospital units, the emergency department, and three primary care practices. The change involved replacing previous education screening items with the BHLS. Implementation was based on a quality improvement framework, with a focus on acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity and sustainability. Support was gained from nursing leadership, education and training was provided, a documentation change was rolled out, feedback was obtained, and uptake of the new health literacy screening items was monitored. RESULTS:Between November 2010 and April 2012, there were 55,611 adult inpatient admissions, and from November 2010 to September 2011, 23,186 adult patients made 39,595 clinic visits to the three primary care practices. The completion (uptake) rate was 91.8% for the hospital and 66.6% for the outpatient clinics. CONCLUSIONS:Although challenges exist, it is feasible to incorporate health literacy screening into clinical assessment and EHR documentation. Next steps are to evaluate the association of health literacy with processes and outcomes of care across inpatient and outpatient populations.

SUBMITTER: Cawthon C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4072202 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementing routine health literacy assessment in hospital and primary care patients.

Cawthon Courtney C Mion Lorraine C LC Willens David E DE Roumie Christianne L CL Kripalani Sunil S

Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety 20140201 2

<h4>Background</h4>Patients with inadequate health literacy often have poorer health outcomes and increased utilization and costs. The Institute of Medicine has recommended that health literacy assessment be incorporated into health care information systems, which would facilitate large-scale studies of the effects of health literacy, as well as evaluation of system interventions to improve care by addressing health literacy. As part of the Health Literacy Screening (HEALS) study, a Brief Health ...[more]

PMID: 24716329

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:An estimated 8.2 million adults in the United States live with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. Although the benefits of integrated treatment services for persons with co-occurring disorders has been well-established, gaps in access to integrated care persist. Implementation research can address this gap. We evaluated if the Network for the Improvement of Addiction Treatment (NIATx) implementation strategy was effective in increasing integrated services capacity among organizations treating persons with co-occurring disorders. METHODS:This study employed a cluster randomized waitlist control group design. Forty-nine addiction treatment organizations from the State of Washington were randomized into one of two study arms: (1) NIATx strategy (active implementation strategy), or (2) waitlist (control). The primary outcome was a standardized organizational measure of integrated service capability: the Dual Diagnosis in Addiction Treatment (DDCAT) Index. Intent-to-treat analyses and per-protocol analyses were conducted to address the following questions: (1) Is NIATx effective in increasing integrated service capacity? and (2) Are there differences in organizations that actually use NIATx per-protocol versus those that do not? RESULTS:From baseline to one-year post active implementation, both the NIATx strategy and waitlist arms demonstrated improvements over time in DDCAT Index total and DDCAT dimension scores. In intent-to-treat analyses, a moderate but statistically significant difference in improvement between study arms was seen only in the Program Milieu dimension (p =?0.020, Cohen's d?=?0.54). In per-protocol analyses, moderate-to-large effects in Program Milieu (p =?0.002, Cohen's d?=?0.91) and Continuity of Care (p =?0.026, Cohen's d?=?0.63) dimensions, and in total DDCAT Index (p =?0.046, Cohen's d?=?0.51) were found. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, organizations in both study arms improved DDCAT Index scores over time. Organizations in the NIATx strategy arm with full adherence to the NIATx protocol had significantly greater improvements in the primary outcome measure of integrated service capacity for persons with co-occurring disorders. TRAIL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03007940 . Retrospectively registered January 2017.

Project description:BackgroundMany patients with mental disorders are treated by their general practitioner (GP). Innovative technology-based integrated care models (e.g., mental health specialist video consultations) have been proposed to facilitate access to specialist services in primary care settings. While perspectives of patients and providers have been examined, there is little insight into the perspectives of health policy experts on such models. The purpose of this study was to examine the perspectives of health policy experts on (1) current challenges for continuity of care, (2) anticipated benefits and barriers for implementation of mental health specialist video consultations along with (3) practical and regulative preconditions for sustained implementation in primary care.MethodsIn a cross-sectional qualitative study, we conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with health policy experts representing various stakeholders in the German health care system: health insurances, governmental bodies, clinicians' professional associations, and patient representatives. Following a critical realism approach, we applied a qualitative inductive content analysis to derive key themes from the material.ResultsHealth policy experts saw long waiting times for patients and a lack of collaboration between in- and outpatient mental health services as well as mental health specialists and GPs as main barriers for current continuity of care. Health policy experts also felt that video consultations bear great potential to foster coordinated care between GPs and specialists and ensure timely referral for severely burdened patients. Increased workload for the general practice staff to facilitate video consultations and difficulties in establishing reliable therapeutic alliances between patients and specialists via remote treatment were considered as major barriers. Health policy experts varied significantly in their level of knowledge concerning legal frameworks and regulations pertaining to video consultations. However, the implementation of appropriate reimbursement schemes and sufficient data protection were regarded as the major regulative challenges.ConclusionsHealth policy experts mostly consider mental health specialist video consultations as a promising way to overcome current challenges for the management of patients with mental disorders at the interface between primary and specialist care. To ensure sustained implementation, a multi-stakeholder approach accounting for the perspective of health policy experts, patients, and providers should be followed.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00012487.

Project description:BackgroundeHealth literacy is a key concept in the implementation of eHealth resources. However, most eHealth literacy definitions and frameworks are designed from the perceptive of the individual receiving eHealth care, which do not include health care providers' eHealth literacy or acceptance of delivering eHealth resources.AimsTo identify existing research on eHealth literacy domains and measurements and identify eHealth literacy scores and associated factors among hospital health care providers.MethodsThis systematic review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist. A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cinahl, Embase, Scopus, PEDro, AMED and Web of Science. Quantitative studies assessing eHealth literacy with original research, targeting hospital health care providers were included. Three eHealth literacy domains based on the eHealth literacy framework were defined a priori; (1) Individual eHealth literacy, (2) Interaction with the eHealth system, and (3) Access to the system. Pairs of authors independently assessed eligibility, appraised methodological quality and extracted data.ResultsFourteen publications, of which twelve publications were conducted in non-Western countries, were included. In total, 3,666 health care providers within eleven different professions were included, with nurses being the largest group. Nine of the included studies used the eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS) to measure eHealth literacy, representing the domain of individual eHealth literacy. A minority of the studies covered domains such as interaction with the eHealth system and access to the system. The mean eHEALS score in the studies ranged from 27.8 to 31.7 (8-40), indicating a higher eHealth literacy. One study reported desirable eHealth literacy based on the Digital Health Literacy Instrument. Another study reported a relatively high score on the Staff eHealth literacy questionnaire. eHealth literacy was associated with socio-demographic factors, experience of technology, health behaviour and work-related factors.ConclusionsHealth care providers have good individual eHealth literacy. However, more research is needed on the eHealth literacy domains dependent on interaction with the eHealth system and access to the system. Furthermore, most studies were conducted in Eastern and Central-Africa, and more research is thus needed in a Western context.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022363039).

Project description:BackgroundWeb-based therapies hold great promise to increase accessibility and reduce costs of delivering mental health care; however, uptake in routine settings has been low.ObjectiveOur objective in this review was to summarize what is known about health care professionals' perceptions of the barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of web-based psychological treatments in routine care of adults in health care settings.MethodsWe searched 5 major databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library) for qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods studies exploring health professionals' views on computer- or internet-based psychological treatment programs. We coded included articles for risk of bias and extracted data using a prepiloted extraction sheet.ResultsWe identified 29 eligible articles: 14 qualitative, 11 quantitative, and 4 mixed methods. We identified the following themes: patient factors, health professional factors, the therapeutic relationship, therapy factors, organizational and system factors, and models of care. Health professionals supported web-based therapies only for patients with relatively straightforward, low-risk diagnoses, strong motivation and engagement, high computer literacy and access, and low need for tailored content. They perceived flexibility with timing and location as advantages of web-based therapy, but preferred blended therapy to facilitate rapport and allow active monitoring and follow-up of patients. They emphasized the need for targeted training and organizational support to manage changed workflows. Health professionals were concerned about the confidentiality and security of client data for web-based programs, suggesting that clear and transparent protocols need to be in place to reassure health professionals before they will be willing to refer.ConclusionsWithout health professionals' support, many people will not access web-based therapies. To increase uptake, it is important to ensure that health professionals receive education, familiarization, and training to support them in incorporating web-based therapies into their practice, and to design systems that support health professionals in this new way of working with patients and addressing their concerns.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42018100869; https://tinyurl.com/y5vaoqsk.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Early detection of cognitive impairment is a goal of high-quality geriatric medical care, but new approaches are needed to reduce rates of missed cases. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether adding routine cognitive screening to primary care visits for older adults increases rates of dementia diagnosis, specialist referral, or prescribing of antidementia medications. SETTING: Four primary care clinics in a university-affiliated primary care network. DESIGN: A quality improvement screening project and quasiexperimental comparison of 2 intervention clinics and 2 control clinics. The Mini-Cog was administered by medical assistants to intervention clinic patients aged 65+ years. Rates of dementia diagnoses, referrals, and medication prescribing were tracked over time using computerized administrative data. RESULTS: Twenty-six medical assistants successfully screened 70% (n = 524) of all eligible patients who made at least 1 clinic visit during the intervention period; 18% screened positive. There were no complaints about workflow interruption. Relative to baseline rates and control clinics, Mini-Cog screening was associated with increased dementia diagnoses, specialist referrals, and prescribing of cognitive enhancing medications. Patients without previous dementia indicators who had a positive Mini-Cog were more likely than all other patients to receive a new dementia diagnosis, specialty referral, or cognitive enhancing medication. However, relevant physician action occurred in only 17% of screen-positive patients. Responses were most related to the lowest Mini-Cog score level (0/5) and advanced age. CONCLUSION: Mini-Cog screening by office staff is feasible in primary care practice and has measurable effects on physician behavior. However, new physician action relevant to dementia was likely to occur only when impairment was severe, and additional efforts are needed to help primary care physicians follow up appropriately on information suggesting cognitive impairment in older patients.

Dataset Information

Implementing routine health literacy assessment in hospital and primary care patients.

Publications

Implementing routine health literacy assessment in hospital and primary care patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets