Effect of Health Literacy on Decision-Making Preferences among Medically Underserved Patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Seo J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5546799 | biostudies-other | 2016 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between health literacy and overall medication nonadherence, unintentional nonadherence, and intentional nonadherence. Limited health literacy may be associated with worse diabetes outcomes, but the literature shows mixed results, and mechanisms remain unclear. Medication adherence is associated with diabetes outcomes and may be a mediating factor. Distinguishing between unintentional and intentional nonadherence may elucidate the relationship between health literacy and nonadherence in patients with type 2 diabetes.Cross-sectional study of 208 patients with type 2 diabetes recruited from a primary care clinic in St. Louis, Missouri. Information was obtained from written questionnaire and patient medical records. Bivariate and multivariable regression were used to examine predictors of medication nonadherence.The majority of patients in the study were low income, publicly insured, and African American, with limited health literacy and a high school/GED education or less. In multivariable models, limited health literacy was significantly associated with increased unintentional nonadherence but not intentional nonadherence.Results suggest differences in factors affecting intentional and unintentional nonadherence. The findings also suggest interventions are needed to decrease unintentional nonadherence among patients with type 2 diabetes and limited health literacy. Efforts to address unintentional medication nonadherence among patients with type 2 diabetes with limited health literacy may improve patient health.
| S-EPMC5546794 | biostudies-other
Project description:The increasing importance of genomic information in clinical care heightens the need to examine how individuals understand, value, and communicate about this information. Based on a conceptual framework of genomics-related health literacy, we examined whether health literacy was related to knowledge, self-efficacy, and perceived importance of genetics and family health history (FHH) and communication about FHH in a medically underserved population. The analytic sample was composed of 624 patients at a primary care clinic in a large urban hospital. About half of the participants (47%) had limited health literacy; 55% had no education beyond high school, and 58% were Black. In multivariable models, limited health literacy was associated with lower genetic knowledge (β = -0.55, SE = 0.10, p < .0001), lower awareness of FHH (odds ratio [OR] = 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.28, 0.90], p = .020), and greater perceived importance of genetic information (OR = 1.95, 95% CI [1.27, 3.00], p = .0022) but lower perceived importance of FHH information (OR = 0.47, 95% CI [0.26, 0.86], p = .013) and more frequent communication with a doctor about FHH (OR = 2.02, 95% CI [1.27, 3.23], p = .0032). The findings highlight the importance of considering domains of genomics-related health literacy (e.g., knowledge, oral literacy) in developing educational strategies for genomic information. Health literacy research is essential to avoid increasing disparities in information and health outcomes as genomic information reaches more patients.
| S-EPMC5546792 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:The American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends men have the opportunity to make an informed decision about screening for prostate cancer (PCa). The ACS developed a unique decision aid (ACS-DA) for this purpose. However, to date, studies evaluating the efficacy of the ACS-DA are lacking. The authors evaluated the ACS-DA among a cohort of medically underserved men (MUM). METHODS:A multiethnic cohort of MUM (n?=?285) was prospectively included between June 2010 and December 2014. The ACS-DA was presented in a group format. Levels of knowledge on PCa were evaluated before and after the presentation. Participants' decisional conflict and thoughts about the presentation also were evaluated. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with having an adequate level of knowledge. RESULTS:Before receiving the ACS-DA, 33.1% of participants had adequate knowledge on PCa, and this increased to 77% after the DA (P?<?.0001). On multivariate analysis, higher education level (odds ratio, 11.19; P?=?.001) and history of another cancer (odds ratio, 7.45; P?=?.03) were associated with having adequate knowledge after receiving the DA. Levels of decisional conflict were low and were correlated with levels of knowledge after receiving the DA. The majority of men also rated the presentation as favorable and would recommend the ACS-DA to others. CONCLUSIONS:Use of the ACS-DA was feasible among MUM and led to increased PCa knowledge. This also correlated with low levels of decisional conflict. The ACS-DA presented to groups of men may serve as a feasible tool for informed decision making in a MUM population. Cancer 2017;123:583-591. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
| S-EPMC5293675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Advance directives are a sensitive issue among traditional Chinese people, who usually refrain from mentioning this topic until it is imperative. Medical decisions for cancer patients are made by their families, and these decisions might violate patients' personal will.This study aimed to examine the acceptance of advance directives among Chinese cancer patients and their families and patient participation in this procedure and, finally, to analyze the moral risk involved.While 246 patients and their family members refused official discussion of an advance directive, the remaining 166 patients and their families accepted the concept of an advance directive and signed a document agreeing to give up invasive treatment when the anti-cancer treatment was terminated. Of these, only 24 patients participated in the decision making. For 101 patients, anti-cancer therapy was ended prematurely with as many as 37 patients not told about their potential loss of health interests.Participants were 412 adult cancer patients from 9 leading hospitals across China. An advance directive was introduced to the main decision makers for each patient; if they wished to sign it, the advance directive would be systematically discussed. A questionnaire was given to the oncologists in charge of each patient to evaluate the interaction between families and patients, patients' awareness of their disease, and participation in an advance directive.Advance directives were not widely accepted among Chinese cancer patients unless anti-cancer therapy was terminated. Most cancer patients were excluded from the discussion of an advance directive.
| S-EPMC5542195 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundShared decision-making is defined as the process by which physicians and informed patients make a shared medical decision, taking into account the preferences and values of the patients. It is well known that shared decision-making practices improve both clinicians' and patients' satisfaction and lead to better treatment outcomes. The aim of the study was to assess associations between patients' roles in decision-making, health literacy levels, and treatment outcomes of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs).MethodsIn total, 131 participants were enrolled. Participants underwent interview and physical examination at baseline and six months after TMD management. TMD was diagnosed according to Diagnostic Criteria/TMD criteria. Myofascial trigger points were bilaterally evaluated in the two masticatory muscles including the temporalis and masseter muscles. The roles that participants preferred to play or had perceived during decision-making and their health literacy levels were assessed using Control Preferences Scale and Newest Vital Sign, respectively.ResultsParticipants who perceived themselves as occupying active roles in decision-making showed higher health literacy levels than those with passive perceived roles. Participants with appropriate health literacy showed higher perceived participation levels in decision-making than did those with limited health literacy. The extent of subjective symptomatic improvement after six months of treatment showed significant associations with perceived role in decision-making, despite lack of significant relationships between perceived role in decision-making and the extent of improvement of objective parameters.ConclusionActive participation of patients in decision-making improves the satisfaction but limited health literacy constitutes barriers to effective patient engagement during TMD management.
| S-EPMC9446804 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStable angina patients have difficulty understanding the tradeoffs between treatment alternatives. In this analysis, we assessed treatment planning conversations for stable angina to determine whether inadequate health literacy acts as a barrier to communication that may partially explain this difficulty.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive analysis of patient questionnaire data from the PCI Choice Trial. The main outcomes were the responses to the Decisional Conflict Scale and the proportion of correct responses to knowledge questions about stable angina. We also conducted a qualitative analysis on recordings of patient-clinician discussions about treatment planning. The recordings were coded with the OPTION12 instrument for shared decision-making. Two analysts independently assessed the number and types of patient questions and expressions of preferences.ResultsPatient engagement did not differ by health literacy level and was generally low for all patients with respect to OPTION12 scores and the number of questions related to clinical aspects of treatment. Patients with inadequate health literacy had significantly higher decisional conflict. However, the proportion of knowledge questions answered correctly did not differ significantly by health literacy level.ConclusionsPatients with inadequate health literacy had greater decisional conflict but no difference in knowledge compared to patients with adequate health literacy. Inadequate health literacy may act as a barrier to communication, but gaps were found in patient engagement and knowledge for patients of all health literacy levels. The recorded patient-clinician encounters and the health literacy measure were valuable resources for conducting research on care delivery.
| S-EPMC6688543 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly promoted in the primary care setting, but depressive symptoms, which are associated with cognitive changes, may influence decision-making preferences. We sought to assess whether elevated depressive symptoms are associated with decision-making preference in patients with comorbid chronic illness.We enrolled 195 patients ?18years old with uncontrolled hypertension from two urban, academic primary care clinics. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Clinician-directed decision-making preference was assessed according to the Control Preference Scale. The impact of depressive symptoms on decision-making preference was assessed using generalized linear mixed models adjusted for age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, Medicaid status, Charlson Comorbidity Index, partner status, and clustering within clinicians.The mean age was 64.2years; 72% were women, 77% Hispanic, 38% Black, and 33% had elevated depressive symptoms. Overall, 35% of patients preferred clinician-directed decision-making, 19% mostly clinician-directed, 39% shared, and 7% some or little clinician-input. Patients with (vs. without) elevated depressive symptoms were more likely to prefer clinician-directed decision-making (46% versus 29%; p=0.02; AOR 2.51, 95% CI 1.30-4.85, p=0.005). Remitted depressive symptoms (vs. never depressed) were not associated with preference.Elevated depressive symptoms are associated with preference for clinician-directed decision-making. We suggest that clinicians should be aware of this effect when incorporating preference into their communication styles and take an active role in eliciting patient values and exchanging information about treatment choice, all important components of shared decision-making, particularly when patients are depressed.
| S-EPMC4889561 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundA number of previous studies have suggested that the Japanese have few opportunities to participate in medical decision-making, as a result both of entrenched physician paternalism and national characteristics of dependency and passivity. The hypothesis that Japanese patients would wish to participate in treatment decision-making if adequate information were provided, and the decision to be made was clearly identified, was tested by interview survey.MethodsThe subjects were diabetic patients at a single outpatient clinic in Kyoto. One of three case study vignettes (pneumonia, gangrene or cancer) was randomly assigned to each subject and, employing face-to-face interviews, the subjects were asked what their wishes would be as patients, for treatment information, participation in decision-making and family involvement.Results134 patients participated in the study, representing a response rate of 90%. The overall proportions of respondents who preferred active, collaborative, and passive roles were 12%, 71%, and 17%, respectively. Respondents to the cancer vignette were less likely to prefer an active role and were more likely to prefer family involvement in decision-making compared to non-cancer vignette respondents. If a physician's recommendation conflicted with their own wishes, 60% of the respondents for each vignette answered that they would choose to respect the physician's opinion, while few respondents would give the family's preference primary importance.ConclusionsOur study suggested that a majority of Japanese patients have positive attitudes towards participation in medical decision making if they are fully informed. Physicians will give greater patient satisfaction if they respond to the desire of patients for participation in decision-making.
| S-EPMC375530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInterpreting health information and acquiring health knowledge have become more important with the accumulation of scientific medical knowledge and ideals of patient autonomy. Health literacy and its tremendous success as a concept can be considered an admission that not all is well in the distribution of health knowledge. The internet makes health information much more easily accessible than ever, but it introduces its own problems, of which health disinformation is a major one.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine whether objective and subjective health literacy are independent concepts and to test which of the two was associated more strongly with accurate judgments of the quality of a medical website and with behavioral intentions beneficial to health.MethodsA survey on depression and its treatments was conducted online (n=362). The Newest Vital Sign was employed to measure objective, performance-based health literacy, and the eHealth Literacy Scale was used to measure subjective, perception-based health literacy. Correlations, comparisons of means, linear and binary logistic regression, and mediation models were used to determine the associations.ResultsObjective and subjective health literacy were weakly associated with one another (r=0.06, P=.24). High objective health literacy levels were associated with an inclination to behave in ways that are beneficial to one's own or others' health (Exp[B]=2.068, P=.004) and an ability to recognize low-quality online sources of health information (β=-.4698, P=.005). The recognition also improved participants' choice of treatment (β=-.3345, P<.001). Objective health literacy helped people to recognize misinformation on health websites and improved their judgment on their treatment for depression.ConclusionsSelf-reported, perception-based health literacy should be treated as a separate concept from objective, performance-based health literacy. Only objective health literacy appears to have the potential to prevent people from becoming victims of health disinformation.
| S-EPMC7861996 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth literacy among Japanese is often low, making it difficult for them to evaluate health information and make informed decisions. However, the health literacy scales applied measure the perceived difficulty of health-related tasks; they do not directly assess the specific skills needed to perform the tasks: the skills to judge the reliability of diverse information using evaluation criteria and implement rational decision-making. Therefore, the study objectives were to investigate the following issues using a nationwide survey in Japan. (1) When obtaining information, to what extent do people apply criteria for evaluating information to confirm its reliability; when making decisions, to what extent do they seek out available options and compare pros and cons based on their own values? (2) How strongly are such skills associated with health literacy and demographic characteristics? (3) What opportunities are available to learn these skills?MethodsWe conducted an online questionnaire survey using a Japanese Internet research company; 3,914 valid responses were received. The measures comprised health literacy (European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire), five items on information evaluation, four items on decision-making, and items on the availability and location of learning opportunities. We calculated Pearson correlations to explore the association of health literacy with information-evaluation and decision-making skills. Multivariate analyses were also conducted using these factors as dependent variables.ResultsFewer than half (30%-50%) of respondents reported always or often evaluating information and engaging in decision-making. Health literacy was significantly and positively correlated with the specific skills of information evaluation and decision-making (r = .26 and .30, respectively) as were multivariate analyses (beta = .15 and .22, respectively). Over 40% of respondents had never learned those skills. The most common resources for learning the skills were the Internet and television; less-used resources were schools and workplaces.ConclusionsBoth information-evaluation and decision-making skills were associated with health literacy. However, these skills are not sufficiently widespread in Japan because there are few opportunities to acquire them. More research is needed to raise awareness of the importance of such skills for improving health literacy and providing learning opportunities.
| S-EPMC9344668 | biostudies-literature