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

Evaluation of Health Literacy Levels and Associated Factors Among Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome and Heart Failure in Qatar

PURPOSE

To determine the prevalence of inadequate health literacy and its associated risk factors among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or heart failure (HF) in Qatar.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study was conducted among patients with ACS and/or HF attending the national Heart Hospital in Qatar. Health literacy was assessed using the abbreviated version of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA) and the Three-item Brief Health Literacy Screen (3-item BHLS).

RESULTS

Three hundred patients with ACS and/or HF, majority male (88%) and non-Qatari (94%), participated in the study. The median (IQR) age of the participants was 55 (11) years. The prevalence of inadequate to marginal health literacy ranged between 36% and 54%. There were statistically significant differences in health literacy level between patients based on their marital status (p=0.010), education (p≤0.001), ability to speak any of Arabic, English, Hindi, Urdu, Malayalam, or other languages (p-values ≤0.001 to 0.035), country of origin (p≤0.001), occupation (p≤0.001), and receiving information from a pharmacist (p=0.008), a physiotherapist (p≤0.001), or a nurse (p=0.004).

CONCLUSION

Inadequate health literacy is common among patients with ACS and/or HF. This study suggests a need for developing strategies to assist healthcare professionals in improving health literacy skills among patients with ACS and HF. A combination of interventions may be needed to improve patients' understanding of their disease and medications, and ultimately overall health outcomes.

Lived experiences of radiation therapists using health literacy strategies with patients-A qualitative review using interpretative phenomenological analysis

INTRODUCTION

Adaptive communication is an essential requirement to deliver quality patient-centred care. Determining patients' informational needs and acting on the needs are skills radiation therapists (RTs) employ daily with patients. Learning health literacy (HL) strategies to assist with the informational delivery provides RTs with options to improve patients' understanding of vital radiotherapy treatment information or tasks. This research investigates the lived experiences of RTs from the Illawarra and Shoalhaven Cancer Care Centres in Australia using HL strategies during patient interactions after undertaking HL training workshops.

METHODS

An interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach was used. Audio-recorded semi-structured interviews were conducted with six RTs. Two reviewers analysed each interview script separately before discussing and constructing substantive and sub-themes.

RESULTS

Four substantive themes were constructed: RT personal attitudes and responses to HL, HL strategies used by RTs, patient associated HL needs and barriers when addressing patient HL needs. RTs were either person- or process-focussed during patient interactions. It was identified that information is provided to patients according to how RTs themselves like to learn new information.

CONCLUSION

This research has allowed an opportunity to inquire into the lived experiences of RTs implementing HL strategies when providing information to patients. While RTs may be person or process-focussed, the patient's needs are always prioritised when providing information, which ultimately results in patient understanding and increased engagement.

Silenced: Patients' experiences of voicelessness in head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this qualitative study was to explore patients' experiences of communicating with health professionals following a diagnosis of head and neck cancer (HNC).

METHODS

A qualitative research approach based on social constructionist theory was used. A total of 21 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with people diagnosed with HNC. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes.

RESULTS

The experience of losing the capacity for speech was experienced by survivors of HNC as distressing and traumatic. Voicelessness was not just a loss of physical speech, but a holistic experience of silencing. A number of tensions emerged including patients' experiences of losing their voice and then finding different ways to verbally express themselves; in interactions with health professionals there was a tension between abrupt, hurried communication and a slower, more mindful communication style. Sub-themes around communication style emerged where disparities between levels of health literacy were unaddressed, and patients' experienced a lack of empathy. Another tension experienced was between an old style medical model and the ideal of person-centred care and the biopsychosocial model of health.

CONCLUSION

Whether HNC patients lose their voice temporarily, have periods of voicelessness, or are able to speak, but feel unheard, the treatment experience is too often one of disempowerment and silencing of their perspectives.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Health professionals are challenged to find creative communication methods, to practice mindful listening, source speech pathology and adaptive technologies, and to facilitate communication that supports patients in expressing their values, preferences and needs.

Healthcare Provider Analogies as Memorable Messages

Healthcare providers must explain medical information to patients in a way that patients can understand. Provider use of analogies is one strategy that may help patients better understand medical information. The present study, guided by a memorable message framework, investigated whether participants remembered any analogies used by their healthcare providers, and included a content analysis of the function the analogies served, the types of analogies participants remembered, and the body systems associated with the health issues that were described. Almost one-quarter of participants recalled an analogy used by a provider. The most frequently recalled analogies functioned to describe health conditions or phenomena, followed by elements of the body, and treatments or something external to the body. Analogies were most frequently used to describe health issues associated with the cardiovascular system, musculoskeletal system, digestive system, dental, eye, or skin issues, or the nervous system. The analogies were categorized as mechanical, a feeling or experience, random object, structure, food, nature, war/battle, or medical/body. Provider analogies may be a type of memorable message for some patients. Providers could consider using suitable analogies to explain health issues when communicating with patients, and be trained in effective use of analogies.

Supporting health literacy using an interactive app for symptom management during radiotherapy for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

Patients' ability to self-monitor symptoms and engage in self-care activities is dependent upon their level of health literacy. Health literacy and self-care ability was compared in men with prostate cancer undergoing radiotherapy that used an app for symptom management with a control group.

METHODS

Included were an intervention group (n = 66), who used an app for symptom reporting and support for self-care, and a control group (n = 64). Outcomes were Functional Health Literacy, Communicative and Critical Health Literacy and Appraisal of Self-Care Agency (ASA-A).

RESULTS

The intervention group had improved regarding "ability to select information needed from a variety of information sources" (p = .020), "ability to determine the information credible" (p = .041), and "being able to plan and decide what to do to improve health" (p = .004). No inter-group difference was found for ASA-A.

CONCLUSIONS

With the support of an app for reporting and managing symptoms, important advanced health literacy skills of selecting, determining, and judging information credible may improve.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer may benefit from an individualized approach, such as an app, for communication with health care providers and as a source of health information to make decisions about their own health.

Radiation therapist health literacy training: A qualitative study exploring perceived barriers and attitudes

INTRODUCTION

Health literacy (HL) is a universal issue in healthcare. While difficult to assess an individual's HL status, the onus is on the health provider to empower patients to seek understanding of health information provided to them. Universal HL training techniques include implementing plain language and the teach-back method. The research aims to explore the perceptions of Australian radiation therapists (RTTs) learning and implementation of these tools with patients.

METHODS

RTTs attended two communication and HL workshops one week apart. Participants completed three anonymous surveys (before the first workshop, immediately after the second and three months post workshops) and a workshop evaluation was administered after the second workshop. Participants had the opportunity to provide written comments on all surveys and the evaluation form. A thematic analysis was performed on the written comments by two independent researchers.

RESULTS

Five themes were revealed after the thematic analysis of the surveys. These themes were: improved patient understanding, impact on professional credibility, practice and timing of using methods, appearing to be condescending to educated patients and increased patient anxiety. The workshop evaluation assessment indicated the success of and improvement for future workshops and revealed seven themes. These were: learning from others, providing a safe environment to share experiences, to be open to learning new methods, more time for learning, role-play aversion, group sizing and thinking beyond the workshops.

CONCLUSION

While strong evidence of using HL tools for improved patient understanding exists, this qualitative review revealed unexpected barriers with implementing both the plain language and teach-back method.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Barriers revealed during HL training could have patient flow on effects when checking for understanding. These challenges need further exploration, to inform all health professionals.

A low literacy targeted talking book about radiation therapy for cancer: development and acceptability

PURPOSE

To develop a low literacy talking book (written book with accompanying audio-recording) about radiation therapy and explore its acceptability with patients and caregivers.

METHOD

The talking book was developed iteratively using low literacy design principles and a multidisciplinary committee comprising consumers and experts in radiation oncology, nursing, behavioural sciences, and linguistics. It contained illustrations, photos, and information on: treatment planning, daily treatment, side effects, psychosocial health, and a glossary of medical terms. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients who self-reported low functional health literacy and caregivers to explore their views on the resource. Thematic analysis using a framework approach informed the analysis.

RESULTS

Participants were very satisfied with the content, illustrations, and language in the resource. Most were unfamiliar with the term 'talking book', but liked the option of different media (text and audio). The resource was seen as facilitating communication with the cancer care team by prompting question-asking and equipping patients and their families with knowledge to communicate confidently.

CONCLUSIONS

The low literacy talking book was well accepted by patients and their caregivers. The next step is to examine the effect of the resource on patients' knowledge, anxiety, concerns, and communication with the cancer care team.

What information is communicated by radiation therapists to patients during education sessions on the first day of treatment?

This study examined the content covered by radiation therapists (RTs) during education sessions; the frequency and types of questions asked by patients; and the relationship between patient characteristics and the number of questions asked. Fifty-eight education sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A coding scheme was developed to examine the frequency of topics covered. It comprised 16 topics under four themes: (a) treatment schedule, (b) procedural information, (c) treatment-related side effects and (d) who will be involved in treatment provision. All education sessions covered information about the treatment plan (n = 58, 100%), and the majority described procedural information about what happens in the treatment room (n = 56, 97%). Least information was given about who will be providing treatment. On average, patients asked a mean of 6 questions (SD = 4.95; range = 0-28). Most frequently asked questions concerned the general treatment (logistics, schedule), accounting for 67% of all questions asked. The least common types of questions were related to the impact of treatment (6%). There were no statistically significant differences in the total number of questions and patient demographics. Patients are provided with most, but not all, of the recommended information. Tailoring of information by RTs was enabled in response to questions asked.

Patient education using virtual reality increases knowledge and positive experience for breast cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy

PURPOSE

Improved access to technology in the radiation therapy (RT) workforce education has resulted in opportunities for innovative patient education methods. This study investigated the impact of a newly developed education tool using the Virtual Environment for Radiotherapy Training (VERT) system on patients' RT knowledge and anxiety.

METHOD

Breast cancer patients were recruited into a control group (CG) (n = 18) who underwent the standard pre-RT education package at a targeted cancer therapy centre, followed by a VERT group (VG) (n = 19). VG patients attended a VERT-based education session detailing RT immobilisation, planning and treatment. All patients completed questionnaires at four time points throughout their treatment, with survey sub-sections on RT knowledge, experience and anxiety.

RESULTS

For both groups, anxiety levels were highest at time point 1(T1 after initial radiation oncologist consultation) (CG, 41.2; VG, 43.1), with a gradual decrease observed thereafter at time points before simulation, at the beginning of treatment and at the end of treatment (p > 0.05). The VG's RT knowledge scores were statistically significantly higher than those of the CG scores at all time points following VERT education (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study reports the high value of VERT breast cancer-targeted education programs in improving RT knowledge and perhaps decreasing patient anxiety. Continued efforts are required to improve patients' accessibility to VERT in Australia, and to better understand the effect of VERT's unique educational features on patients' emotional and physical needs throughout their RT.

The perspective of healthcare providers and patients on health literacy: a systematic review of the quantitative and qualitative studies

AIM

Health literacy (HL) is a multifaceted concept, thus understanding the perspective of healthcare providers, patients, and the system is vital. This systematic review examines and synthesises the available studies on HL-related knowledge, attitude, practice, and perceived barriers.

METHODS

CINAHL and Medline (via EBSCOhost), Google Scholar, PubMed, ProQuest, Sage Journals, and Science Direct were searched. Both quantitative and/or qualitative studies in the English language were included. Intervention studies and studies focusing on HL assessment tools and prevalence of low HL were excluded. The risk of biasness reduced with the involvement of two reviewers independently assessing study eligibility and quality.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies were included, which consist of 19 quantitative, 9 qualitative, and 2 mixed-method studies. Out of 17 studies, 13 reported deficiency of HL-related knowledge among healthcare providers and 1 among patients. Three studies showed a positive attitude of healthcare providers towards learning about HL. Another three studies demonstrated patients feel shame exposing their literacy and undergoing HL assessment. Common HL communication techniques reported practiced by healthcare providers were the use of everyday language, teach-back method, and providing patients with reading materials and aids, while time constraint was the most reported HL perceived barriers by both healthcare providers and patients.

CONCLUSION

Significant gaps exists in HL knowledge among healthcare providers and patients that needs immediate intervention. Such as, greater effort placed in creating a health system that provides an opportunity for healthcare providers to learn about HL and patients to access health information with taking consideration of their perceived barriers.

Communication during radiation therapy education sessions: The role of medical jargon and emotional support in clarifying patient confusion

OBJECTIVE

Radiation oncology consultations involve explanation of complex technical concepts using medical jargon. This study aimed to: analyse types and frequency of medical jargon that radiation therapists (RTs) use during education sessions; identify how patients seek clarification from RTs; and, explore RTs communication strategies.

METHODS

Education sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed. Medical jargon was analysed using MaxDictio (a vocabulary analysis programme). A distinction was made between specialised (specialised terms used in RT or cancer) and contextual jargon (common everyday words with a different meaning in RT). Qualitative data were analysed using Framework analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients and 10 RTs participated. Contextual treatment jargon were the most frequently used jargon (32.2%) along with general medical terms (34.6%). Patients appeared uncertain about the number of treatments, side effects, and the risks of radiation. Patients sought clarification by asking RTs to explain or repeat information. RTs replaced jargon with a simpler word, used everyday analogies, and diagrams.

CONCLUSION

Use of medical jargon is common in RT education sessions. RTs used different jargon types to varying degrees, but contextual jargon dominated.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Training RTs how to tailor information to enhance patients' understanding would be beneficial. Future research exploring medical jargon used in other (non-) oncology settings is required.

Listening to both sides: A qualitative comparison between patients with hepatitis C and their healthcare professionals' perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to hepatitis C treatment adherence and completion

This qualitative study compares and contrasts the perspectives of healthcare professionals who treat hepatitis C with those of patients in treatment. Comparative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 20 healthcare professionals and 20 patients undergoing treatment for hepatitis C concluded that patients and healthcare professionals disagreed on the source of communication breakdowns, but both felt that individualised clinical information improved adherence. Stigma was recognised as a barrier to treatment adherence by both patients and healthcare professionals. Limitations of the healthcare system, such as patients receiving inconsistent information and long wait times, negatively impacted both patients and providers.

Radiation Oncology and Online Patient Education Materials: Deviating From NIH and AMA Recommendations

PURPOSE

Physicians encourage patients to be informed about their health care options, but much of the online health care-related resources can be beneficial only if patients are capable of comprehending it. This study's aim was to assess the readability level of online patient education resources for radiation oncology to conclude whether they meet the general public's health literacy needs as determined by the guidelines of the United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the American Medical Association (AMA).

METHODS

Radiation oncology-related internet-based patient education materials were downloaded from 5 major professional websites (American Society for Radiation Oncology, American Association of Physicists in Medicine, American Brachytherapy Society, RadiologyInfo.org, and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group). Additional patient education documents were downloaded by searching for key radiation oncology phrases using Google. A total of 135 articles were downloaded and assessed for their readability level using 10 quantitative readability scales that are widely accepted in the medical literature.

RESULTS

When all 10 assessment tools for readability were taken into account, the 135 online patient education articles were written at an average grade level of 13.7 ± 2.0. One hundred nine of the 135 articles (80.7%) required a high school graduate's comprehension level (12th-grade level or higher). Only 1 of the 135 articles (0.74%) met the AMA and NIH recommendations for patient education resources to be written between the third-grade and seventh-grade levels.

CONCLUSION

Radiation oncology websites have patient education material written at an educational level above the NIH and AMA recommendations; as a result, average American patients may not be able to fully understand them. Rewriting radiation oncology patient education resources would likely contribute to the patients' understanding of their health and treatment options, making each physician-patient interaction more productive and efficient.

Listening to both sides: A qualitative comparison between patients with hepatitis C and their healthcare professionals' perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to hepatitis C treatment adherence and completion

This qualitative study compares and contrasts the perspectives of healthcare professionals who treat hepatitis C with those of patients in treatment. Comparative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 20 healthcare professionals and 20 patients undergoing treatment for hepatitis C concluded that patients and healthcare professionals disagreed on the source of communication breakdowns, but both felt that individualised clinical information improved adherence. Stigma was recognised as a barrier to treatment adherence by both patients and healthcare professionals. Limitations of the healthcare system, such as patients receiving inconsistent information and long wait times, negatively impacted both patients and providers.