Dataset Information

Health literacy and patient empowerment: separating con-joined twins in the context of chronic low back pain.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

While health literacy has been widely considered key to patient empowerment, an alternative approach separates both concepts and distinguishes between different types of patients according to their levels of health literacy and empowerment. These types are deemed to vary in their health-related actions and outcomes. In this study, we examine the relationship between health literacy and patient empowerment and compare socio-demographic characteristics, health-related activities, and health outcomes in four types of patients suffering from chronic low back pain (cLBP).

Methods

In a cross-sectional study, 273 cLBP patients from four Swiss cantons (Vaud, Geneva, Fribourg, Ticino) and Lombardy (Italy) were invited by their healthcare providers to complete a self-administered paper-and-pencil questionnaire which assessed patients' health literacy, empowerment, involvement in the medical encounter, medication non-adherence, and perceived pain and functionality as a measure of health outcomes.

Results

Health literacy and patient empowerment were not significantly correlated with each other, r(271) = .09, p > .05, allowing to differentiate between four types of patients based on their levels of health literacy and patient empowerment. Subsequent chi-square tests and analyses of variances revealed significant differences among patients that could, however, only be attributed to health literacy, as in the case of age and educational attainment, or patient empowerment, as in the case of patients' involvement in the medical encounter. No significant differences were evident for gender, medication non-adherence, and health outcomes.

Conclusion

The study provides empirical evidence for the need to consider health literacy and patient empowerment as independent concepts in the context of cLBP but calls for further studies to be able to conclude on how the two concepts interact and determine health-related activities and outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Camerini AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4332654 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Health literacy and patient empowerment: separating con-joined twins in the context of chronic low back pain.

Camerini Anne-Linda AL Schulz Peter J PJ

PloS one 20150213 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>While health literacy has been widely considered key to patient empowerment, an alternative approach separates both concepts and distinguishes between different types of patients according to their levels of health literacy and empowerment. These types are deemed to vary in their health-related actions and outcomes. In this study, we examine the relationship between health literacy and patient empowerment and compare socio-demographic characteristics, health-related activities ...[more]

PMID: 25680195

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disease burden around the world. There is known clinical variation in how LBP is treated and addressed; with one cited reason the lack of availability, or use of, evidence-based guidance for clinicians, consumers, and administrators. Despite this a considerable number of policy directives such as clinical practice guidelines, models of care and clinical tools with the aim of improving quality of LBP care do exist. Here we report on the development of a repository of LBP directives developed in the Australian health system and a content analysis of those directives aimed at deepening our understanding of the guidance landscape. Specifically, we sought to determine: (1) What is the type, scale, and scope of LBP directives available? (2) Who are the key stakeholders that drive low back pain care through directives? (3) What content do they cover? (4) What are their gaps and deficiencies?MethodsWe used online web search and snowballing methods to collate a repository of LBP policy documents collectively called 'directives' including Models of Care (MOC), information sheets, clinical tools, guidelines, surveys, and reports, from the last 20 years. The texts of the directives were analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis adopting methods from descriptive policy content analysis to categorise and analyse content to determine origins, actors, and themes.ResultsEighty-four directives were included in our analysis. Of those, 55 were information sheets aimed at either healthcare providers or patients, nine were clinical tools, three were reports, four were guidelines, four were MOC, two were questionnaires and five were referral forms/criteria. The three main categories of content found in the directives were 1. Low back pain features 2. Standards for clinical encounters and 3. Management of LBP, each of which gave rise to different themes and subthemes. Universities, not-for-profit organizations, government organisations, hospitals/Local Health Districts, professional organisations, consumers, and health care insurers were all involved in the production of policy directives. However, there were no clear patterns of roles, responsibilities or authority between these stakeholder groups.ConclusionDirectives have the potential to inform practice and to contribute to reducing evidence-policy-practice discordance. Documents in our repository demonstrate that while a range of directives exist across Australia, but the evidence base for many was not apparent. Qualitative content analysis of the directives showed that while there has been increasing attention given to models of care, this is not yet reflected in directives, which generally focus on more specific elements of LBP care at the individual patient and practitioner level. The sheer number and variety of directives, from a wide range of sources and various locations within the Australian health system suggests a fragmented policy landscape without clear authoritative sources. There is a need for clearer, easily accessible trustworthy policy directives that are regularly reviewed and that meet the needs of care providers, and information websites need to be evaluated regularly for their evidence-based nature and quality.

Project description:Chronic back pain (CBP) represents a significant public health problem. As one of the most common causes of disability and sick leave, there is a need to develop cost-effective ways, such as Internet-based interventions, to help empower patients to manage their disease. Research has provided evidence for the effectiveness of Internet-based interventions in many fields, but it has paid little attention to the reasons why they are effective.This study aims to assess the impact of interactive sections of an Internet-based self-management intervention on patient empowerment, their management of the disease, and, ultimately, health outcomes.A total of 51 patients were recruited through their health care providers and randomly assigned to either an experimental group with full access to the Internet-based intervention or a control group that was denied access to the interactive sections and knew nothing thereof. The intervention took 8 weeks. A baseline, a mid-term after 4 weeks, and a final assessment after 8 weeks measured patient empowerment, physical exercise, medication misuse, and pain burden.All patients completed the study. Overall, the intervention had a moderate effect (F1.52=2.83, P=.03, ?(2)=0.30, d=0.55). Compared to the control group, the availability of interactive sections significantly increased patient empowerment (midterm assessment: mean difference=+1.2, P=.03, d=0.63; final assessment: mean difference=+0.8, P=.09, d=0.44) and reduced medication misuse (midterm assessment: mean difference=-1.5, P=.04, d=0.28; final assessment: mean difference=-1.6, P=.03, d=-0.55) in the intervention group. Both the frequency of physical exercise and pain burden decreased, but to equal measures in both groups.Results suggest that interactive sections as part of Internet-based interventions can positively alter patients' feelings of empowerment and help prevent medication misuse. Detrimental effects were not observed.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02114788; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02114788 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ROXYVoPR).

Project description:ObjectivesContextual components of treatment previously associated with patient outcomes include the environment, therapeutic relationship and expectancies. Questions remain about which components are most important, how they influence outcomes and comparative effects across treatment approaches. We aimed to identify significant and strong contextual predictors of patient outcomes, test for psychological mediators and compare effects across three treatment approaches.DesignProspective cohort study with patient-reported and practitioner-reported questionnaire data (online or paper) collected at first consultation, 2 weeks and 3 months.SettingPhysiotherapy, osteopathy and acupuncture clinics throughout the UK.Participants166 practitioners (65 physiotherapists, 46 osteopaths, 55 acupuncturists) were recruited via their professional organisations. Practitioners recruited 960 adult patients seeking treatment for low back pain (LBP).Primary and secondary outcomesThe primary outcome was back-related disability. Secondary outcomes were pain and well-being. Contextual components measured were: therapeutic alliance; patient satisfaction with appointment systems, access, facilities; patients' treatment beliefs including outcome expectancies; practitioners' attitudes to LBP and practitioners' patient-specific outcome expectancies. The hypothesised mediators measured were: patient self-efficacy for pain management; patient perceptions of LBP and psychosocial distress.ResultsAfter controlling for baseline and potential confounders, statistically significant predictors of reduced back-related disability were: all three dimensions of stronger therapeutic alliance (goal, task and bond); higher patient satisfaction with appointment systems; reduced patient-perceived treatment credibility and increased practitioner-rated outcome expectancies. Therapeutic alliance over task (ηp 2=0.10, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.14) and practitioner-rated outcome expectancies (ηp 2=0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11) demonstrated the largest effect sizes. Patients' self-efficacy, LBP perceptions and psychosocial distress partially mediated these relationships. There were no interactions with treatment approach.ConclusionsEnhancing contextual components in musculoskeletal healthcare could improve patient outcomes. Interventions should focus on helping practitioners and patients forge effective therapeutic alliances with strong affective bonds and agreement on treatment goals and how to achieve them.

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are no outcome measures assessing the ability of people with non-specific low back pain to self-manage their illness. Inspired by the 'Patient Enablement Instrument', we developed the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP). The aim of this study was to describe the development of the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP) and investigate content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects.MethodsThe PEI-BP consists of 6 items that are rated on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale. Measurement properties were evaluated using the COSMIN taxonomy and were based on three cohorts from primary care with low back pain: The content validity cohort (N = 14) which participated in semi-structured interviews, the GLA:D® Back cohort (N = 272) and the test-retest cohort (N = 37) which both completed self-reported questionnaires. For construct validity and responsiveness, enablement was compared to disability (Oswestry Disability Index), back pain beliefs (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-physical activity), mental health (SF-36), educational level and number of previous episodes of low back pain.ResultsThe PEI-BP was found to have acceptable content validity, construct validity, reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error) and responsiveness. The Smallest Detectable Change was 10.1 points illustrating that a patient would have to change more than 1/6 of the scale range for it to be a true change. A skewed distribution towards the high scores were found at baseline indicating a potentially problematic ceiling effect in the current population.ConclusionsThe PEI-BP can be considered a valid and reliable tool to measure enablement on people seeking care for non-specific LBP. Further testing of the PEI-BP in populations with more severe LBP is recommended.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Dataset Information

Health literacy and patient empowerment: separating con-joined twins in the context of chronic low back pain.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Health literacy and patient empowerment: separating con-joined twins in the context of chronic low back pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets