Developing a toolkit to improve resident and family engagement in the safety of assisted living: Engage-A stakeholder-engaged research protocol.

Assisted living (AL) communities are experiencing rising levels of resident acuity, challenging efforts to balance person-centered care-which prioritizes personhood, autonomy, and relationship-based care practices-with efforts to keep residents safe. Safety is a broad-scale problem in AL that encompasses care concerns (e.g., abuse/neglect, medication errors, inadequate staffing, and infection management) as well as resident issues (e.g., falls, elopement, and medical emergencies). Person and family engagement (PFE) is one approach to achieving a balance between person-centered care and safety. In other settings, PFE interventions have improved patient care processes, outcomes, and experiences. In this paper, we describe the protocol for a multiple methods AHRQ-funded study (Engage) to develop a toolkit for increasing resident and family engagement in AL safety. The study aims are to engage AL residents and family caregivers, AL staff, and other AL stakeholders to (1) identify common AL safety problems; (2) prioritize safety problems and identify and evaluate existing PFE interventions with the potential to address safety problems in the AL setting; and (3) develop a testable toolkit to improve PFE in AL safety. We discuss our methods, including qualitative interviews, a scoping review of existing PFE interventions, and stakeholder panel meetings that involved a Delphi priority-setting exercise. In addition to describing the protocol, we detail how we modified the protocol to address the unique challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. Study findings will result in a toolkit to improve resident and family engagement in the safety of AL that will be tested in future research.

A health literacy analysis of the consumer-oriented COVID-19 information produced by ten state health departments.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the public's need for quality health information that is understandable. This study aimed to identify (1) the extent to which COVID-19 messaging by state public health departments is understandable, actionable, and clear; (2) whether materials produced by public health departments are easily readable; (3) relationships between material type and understandability, actionability, clarity, and reading grade level; and (4) potential strategies to improve public health messaging around COVID-19. METHODS: Based on US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics from June 30, 2020, we identified the ten states with the most COVID-19 cases and selected forty-two materials (i.e., webpages, infographics, and videos) related to COVID-19 prevention according to predefined eligibility criteria. We applied three validated health literacy tools (i.e., Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, CDC Clear Communication Index, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) to assess material understandability, actionability, clarity, and readability. We also analyzed correlations between scores on the three health literacy tools and material types. RESULTS: Overall, COVID-19 materials had high understandability and actionability but could be improved in terms of clarity and readability. Material type was significantly correlated with understandability, actionability, and clarity. Infographics and videos received higher scores on all tools. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we recommend public health entities apply a combination of these tools when developing health information materials to improve their understandability, actionability, and clarity. We also recommend using infographics and videos when possible, taking a human-centered approach to information design, and providing multiple modes and platforms for information delivery.