The impact of health literacy, patient-centered communication and shared decision-making on patients' satisfaction with care received in German primary care practices.

BACKGROUND: Findings on the association between health literacy skills and patient-reported outcomes such as satisfaction with health care delivery are scarce. We explored the extent to which subjective health literacy skills and the perception of the application of patient-centered communication and shared decision-making are associated with patient's satisfaction with care received by their general practitioner (GP). METHODS: A nationwide cross sectional survey was administered in a random sample of 1125 German adults. A binary logistic regression model controlling for demographics and health status was used to examine the independent contributions of predictor variables (i.e. subjective health literacy, shared decision-making, patient-centered communication) on satisfaction with care received by the GP. RESULTS: Respondents with sufficient health literacy skills were 2.06 times as likely (95 % [CI]: 1.002-4.264) and those who were involved in shared decision-making by their GP were 4.02 times as likely (95 % [CI]: 1.849-8.744) to be satisfied with care received by their GP. Respondents who experienced that their GP explained things in an easy to understand way (OR: 4.44; 95 % [CI]: 1.817-10.869), knew important things about their medical history (OR: 3.46; 95 % [CI]: 1.502-7.994) and spent enough time with them, also reported to be more satisfied (OR: 3.12; 95 % [CI]: 1.410-6.905). CONCLUSION: German adults having sufficient subjective health literacy skills and experiencing a more patient-centered relationship with their GP are more likely to be satisfied with care. These findings are important for health care organizations aiming to respond to health literacy needs of patients.

Impact of health literacy, accessibility and coordination of care on patient's satisfaction with primary care in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Although health policy makers call for the transformation of health care organizations to health literacy responsive ones, there is limited evidence on the care experiences of patients with limited health literacy skills (HL) in respect to health care quality. We explored if HL and patient-reported experiences regarding access to care and support in care-coordination in primary care organizations (PCO) have an impact on patients satisfaction with the care received by their personal general practitioner (GP). METHODS: A nationwide representative survey was administered in a random sample of 1125 German adults. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to determine whether HL and perceived access to and coordination of care were associated with satisfaction with care received in primary care adjusting for demographics and health status. RESULTS: In the unadjusted as well as adjusted model, better accessibility of the primary care practice (ß= 1.858; 2.032 p < 0.001) frequent support in care coordination by the general practitioner (ß = 2.680; 2.820 p < 0.001) as well as sufficient HL (ß = 0.888; 1.228 p < 0.05) were independent predictors of a higher satisfaction with care received in the general practice. CONCLUSION: German adults with sufficient HL and positive experiences regarding care coordination and access to care are more satisfied with care received by their personal general practitioner. This result is from major importance for primary care organizations intending to transform their processes and structures to respond to the health literacy needs of their patients more effectively.

[How can we measure cancer literacy?--A systematic review on the quality of available measurement tools]. / Wie können krebsspezifische Gesundheitskompetenzen gemessen werden?--Ein systematischer Review über die Qualität vorhandener Messinstrumente.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Health literacy denoted as the ability to search for, understand and use health related information in health care decision-making is becoming increasingly important for complex chronic diseases such as cancer. There is growing evidence that limited health literacy has a negative impact on individual cancer prevention and disease coping behavior suggesting that interventions for quality assurance in cancer care should consider the health literacy of the target population. This poses the question of how cancer literacy should be operationalized and measured. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review on available instruments to measure cancer literacy. The review was performed according to the PRISMA guideline. Relevant instruments were categorized and evaluated in regard to construct definition, operationalization approach and psychometric properties. RESULTS: Overall, N=12 publications reporting on the development and validation of a cancer literacy instrument could be identified. Cancer literacy is defined as the ability to search for, understand and use health related information in health care decision-making (health literacy) or as the knowledge a layperson needs to understand the information and advice the health system offers with regard to preventing, diagnosing and treating cancerous conditions. In most cases, cancer literacy is operationalized by using cancer knowledge tests across distinct knowledge areas. The analysis of the psychometric properties yields the finding that only every second paper (N=6) is reporting reliability and validity data. Altogether, reliability data is quite satisfactory whereas construct and criterion validity data demonstrates low to moderate correlations between the instruments developed and external criteria as well as comparative instruments. CONCLUSION: The aspect of cancer literacy is gaining relevance in terms of its contribution to quality assurance and patient safety. Currently, there are a limited number of cancer literacy instruments available. Definitions of constructs and instrument conceptions mostly rely on the aspect of cancer knowledge making it difficult to differentiate cancer literacy from cancer knowledge. Prospective studies should take greater account of more sophisticated measurement approaches used to assess health literacy.

Development and validation of a brief screener to measure the Health Literacy Responsiveness of Primary Care Practices (HLPC).

BACKGROUND: The evolving approach of health literate health care organizations (HLHO) receives considerable support from health policy makers. Up to now, there are no performance measures available to assess the application of health literacy strategies by health care professionals in the primary care setting. This paper describes the development and validation of the Health Literate Primary Care Practice screener (HLPC). The screener can be used as a self-assessment tool for primary care organizations (PCO) that aim to elucidate the health literacy responsiveness of their organization. METHODS: The HLPC is a 4-item screener developed in a multi-level process following a theory-driven approach including a literature review, consultations with scientists and cognitive tests with patients in PCO. The screener was applied in a national random sample of N = 1125 adults living in Germany. Item and psychometric properties were analyzed by determining item discrimination and reliability as well as performing a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test the instruments unidimensionality. Criterion validity was investigated by performing bivariate correlations between the HLPC score and heath care quality measures. RESULTS: The HLPC scale demonstrated good item discrimination and internal consistency (α = 0.86). CFA verified a one-factor structure of the scale and analysis on the criterion validity revealed a significant correlation between the HLPC score and patients satisfaction with the general practitioner, accessibility of the PCO and support in care-coordination received in the PCO. CONCLUSIONS: The HLPC is a valid screener to provide insights in the extent of the utilization of health literacy strategies in primary care practices.

The evolution of health literacy assessment tools: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Health literacy (HL) is seen as an increasingly relevant issue for global public health and requires a reliable and comprehensive operationalization. By now, there is limited evidence on how the development of tools measuring HL proceeded in recent years and if scholars considered existing methodological guidance when developing an instrument. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of generic measurement tools developed to assess HL by searching PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL and Web of Knowledge (2009 forward). Two reviewers independently reviewed abstracts/ full text articles for inclusion according to predefined criteria. Additionally we conducted a reporting quality appraisal according to the survey reporting guideline SURGE. RESULTS: We identified 17 articles reporting on the development and validation of 17 instruments measuring health literacy. More than two thirds of all instruments are based on a multidimensional construct of health literacy. Moreover, there is a trend towards a mixed measurement (self-report and direct test) of health literacy with 41% of instruments applying it, though results strongly indicate a weakness of coherence between the underlying constructs measured. Overall, almost every third instrument is based on assessment formats modeled on already existing functional literacy screeners such as the REALM or the TOFHLA and 30% of the included articles do not report on significant reporting features specified in the SURGE guideline. CONCLUSIONS: Scholars recently developing instruments that measure health literacy mainly comply with recommendations of the academic circle by applying multidimensional constructs and mixing up measurement approaches to capture health literacy comprehensively. Nonetheless, there is still a dependence on assessment formats, rooted in functional literacy measurement contradicting the widespread call for new instruments. All things considered, there is no clear "consensus" on HL measurement but a convergence to more comprehensive tools. Giving attention to this finding can help to offer direction towards the development of comparable and reliable health literacy assessment tools that effectively respond to the informational needs of populations.