Health Literacy Rates in a Population of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Southwestern Ontario

OBJECTIVE

To determine the rate of low health literacy in the rheumatoid arthritis (RA) population in southwestern Ontario.

METHODS

For the study, 432 patients with RA were contacted, and 311 completed the assessment. The health literacy levels of the participants were estimated using 4 assessment tools administered in the following order: the Single Item Literacy Screener (SILS), the Medical Term Recognition Test (METER), the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM), and the Shortened Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (STOFHLA).

RESULTS

The rates of low literacy as estimated by STOFHLA, REALM, METER, and SILS were 14.5%, 14.8%, 14.1%, and 18.6%, respectively. All 4 assessment tools were statistically significantly correlated. STOFHLA, REALM, and METER were strongly correlated with each other (r = 0.59-0.79), while SILS only demonstrated moderate correlations with the other assessment tools (r = 0.33-0.45). Multiple linear regression and binary logistic regression analyses revealed that low levels of education and a lack of daily reading activity were common predictors of low health literacy. Using a non-English primary language at home was found to be a strong predictor of low health literacy in STOFHLA, REALM, and METER. Male sex was found to be a significant predictor of poor performance in REALM and METER, but not STOFHLA.

CONCLUSION

Low health literacy is an important issue in the southwestern Ontario RA population. About 1 in 7 patients with RA may not have the necessary skills to become involved in making decisions regarding their personal health. Rheumatologists should be aware of the low health literacy levels of patients with RA and should consider identifying patients at risk of low health literacy.

Comprehensive arthritis referral study -- phase 2: analysis of the comprehensive arthritis referral tool

OBJECTIVE

Rheumatologists triage referrals to assess those patients who may benefit from early intervention. We describe a referral tool and formally evaluate its sensitivity for urgent and early inflammatory arthritis (EIA) referrals.

METHODS

All referrals received on a standardized referral tool were reviewed by a rheumatologist and, based on the information conferred, assigned a triage grade using a previously described triage system. Each referral was also dichotomized as suspected EIA or not. After the initial rheumatologic assessment, the diagnosis was recorded and a consultation grade, blinded to referral grade, was assigned to each case. Agreement between referral and consultation grades was assessed. A regression analysis was performed to determine factors that predicted truly urgent referrals including EIA.

RESULTS

We evaluated 696 referrals. A total of 210 (30.2%) were categorized as urgent at the time of consultation. The referral tool was able to successfully detect 169 of these referrals (sensitivity 80.5%, specificity 79.4%). EIA occurred in 95 (13.6%); of those referrals, 86 were correctly classified as urgent at the time of triage (sensitivity 90.5%, specificity 69.6%). Items that helped correctly discriminate urgent or EIA referrals included patient age < 60, duration of disease, morning stiffness, patient-reported joint swelling, a personal or family history of psoriasis, urgency as rated by referring physician, prior assessment by a rheumatologist, elevated C-reactive protein, and a positive rheumatoid factor.

CONCLUSION

A 1-page referral tool that includes parts completed by the referring physician and patient has good sensitivity to detect urgent referrals including EIA.