Article

Health literacy interventions and outcomes: an updated systematic review.

ABSTRACT To update a 2004 systematic review of health care service use and health outcomes related to differences in health literacy level and interventions designed to improve these outcomes for individuals with low health literacy. Disparities in health outcomes and effectiveness of interventions among different sociodemographic groups were also examined.
We searched MEDLINE®, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, PsychINFO, and the Educational Resources Information Center. For health literacy, we searched using a variety of terms, limited to English and studies published from 2003 to May 25, 2010. For numeracy, we searched from 1966 to May 25, 2010.
We used standard Evidence-based Practice Center methods of dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, abstractions, quality ratings, and strength of evidence grading. We resolved disagreements by consensus. We evaluated whether newer literature was available for answering key questions, so we broadened our definition of health literacy to include numeracy and oral (spoken) health literacy. We excluded intervention studies that did not measure health literacy directly and updated our approach to evaluate individual study risk of bias and to grade strength of evidence.
We included good- and fair-quality studies: 81 studies addressing health outcomes (reported in 95 articles including 86 measuring health literacy and 16 measuring numeracy, of which 7 measure both) and 42 studies (reported in 45 articles) addressing interventions. Differences in health literacy level were consistently associated with increased hospitalizations, greater emergency care use, lower use of mammography, lower receipt of influenza vaccine, poorer ability to demonstrate taking medications appropriately, poorer ability to interpret labels and health messages, and, among seniors, poorer overall health status and higher mortality. Health literacy level potentially mediates disparities between blacks and whites. The strength of evidence of numeracy studies was insufficient to low, limiting conclusions about the influence of numeracy on health care service use or health outcomes. Two studies suggested numeracy may mediate the effect of disparities on health outcomes. We found no evidence concerning oral health literacy and outcomes. Among intervention studies (27 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 2 cluster RCTs, and 13 quasi-experimental designs), the strength of evidence for specific design features was low or insufficient. However, several specific features seemed to improve comprehension in one or a few studies. The strength of evidence was moderate for the effect of mixed interventions on health care service use; the effect of intensive self-management inventions on behavior; and the effect of disease-management interventions on disease prevalence/severity. The effects of other mixed interventions on other health outcomes, including knowledge, self-efficacy, adherence, and quality of life, and costs were mixed; thus, the strength of evidence was insufficient.
The field of health literacy has advanced since the 2004 report. Future research priorities include justifying appropriate cutoffs for health literacy levels prior to conducting studies; developing tools that measure additional related skills, particularly oral (spoken) health literacy; and examining mediators and moderators of the effect of health literacy. Priorities in advancing the design features of interventions include testing novel approaches to increase motivation, techniques for delivering information orally or numerically, "work around" interventions such as patient advocates; determining the effective components of already-tested interventions; determining the cost-effectiveness of programs; and determining the effect of policy and practice interventions.

1 Follower
 · 
180 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although Hispanics have a documented high risk of limited health literacy, there is a scarcity of research with this population group, and particularly with Hispanic immigrants who generally confront language barriers that have been related to low health literacy. The National Action Plan to Improve Health Literacy identified community-based English-language instruction as a strategy that can facilitate a health literate society. However, the literature lacks discussion on this type of intervention. This randomized control trial aimed to test the feasibility of using conventional English-as-a-second-language (ESL) instruction for improving health literacy among Spanish-speaking adults. Objectives included the development, implementation, and evaluation of a health literacy/ESL curriculum. The Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (TOFHLA) in English was used to assess health literacy levels. Analyses included independent sample t test, chi-square, and multiple linear regression. A total of 155 people participated. Results showed a significantly higher increase in the TOFHLA posttest score in the intervention group (p = .01), and noticeable differences in health literacy levels between groups. Results indicate that ESL constitutes a promising venue for improving health literacy among Spanish-speaking adults. Incorporating health literacy-related content may provide additional benefits.
    Journal of Health Communication 01/2015; 20(4):1-8. DOI:10.1080/10810730.2014.965368 · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We investigated the effects of domain-general processing capacity (fluid ability such as working memory), domain-general knowledge (crystallized ability such as vocabulary), and domain-specific health knowledge for two of the most commonly used measures of health literacy (S-TOFHLA and REALM). One hundred forty six community-dwelling older adults participated; 103 had been diagnosed with hypertension. The results showed that older adults who had higher levels of processing capacity or knowledge (domain-general or health) performed better on both of the health literacy measures. Processing capacity interacted with knowledge: Processing capacity had a lower level of association with health literacy for participants with more knowledge than for those with lower levels of knowledge, suggesting that knowledge may offset the effects of processing capacity limitations on health literacy. Furthermore, performance on the two health literacy measures appeared to reflect a different weighting for the three types of abilities. S-TOFHLA performance reflected processing capacity as well as general knowledge, whereas performance on the REALM depended more on general and health knowledge than on processing capacity. The findings support a process-knowledge model of health literacy among older adults, and have implications for selecting health literacy measures in various health care contexts.
    Journal of Health Communication 09/2011; 16 Suppl 3:222-41. DOI:10.1080/10810730.2011.604702 · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • Source