The Effect of Health Literacy on a Brief Intervention to Improve Advance Directive Completion: A Randomized Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: Completion of an advance directive (AD) document is one component of advanced care planning. We evaluated a brief intervention to enhance AD completion and assess whether the intervention effect varied according to health literacy. METHODS: A randomized controlled study was conducted in 2 internal medicine clinics. Participants were over 50, without documented AD, no diagnosis of dementia, and spoke English. Participants were screened for health literacy utilizing REALM-SF. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention, a 15-minute scripted introduction (grade 7 reading level) to our institution's AD forms (grade 11 reading level) or to the control, in which subjects were handed blank AD forms without explanation. Both groups received reminder calls at 1, 3, and 5 months. The primary outcome was AD completion at 6 months. RESULTS: Five hundred twenty-nine subjects were enrolled; half were of limited and half were of adequate health literacy. The AD completion rate was 21.7% and was similar in the intervention vs. the control group (22.4% vs 22.2%, P = .94).More participants with adequate health literacy completed an AD than those with limited health literacy (28.4% vs 16.2%, P = .0008), although the effect of the intervention was no different within adequate or limited literacy groups. CONCLUSION: A brief intervention had no impact on AD completion for subjects of adequate or limited health literacy. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our intervention was designed for easy implementation and to be accessible to patients of adequate or limited health literacy. This intervention was not more likely than the control (handing patients an AD form) to improve AD completion for patients of either limited or adequate health literacy. Future efforts and research to improve AD completion rates should focus on interventions that include: multiple inperson contacts with patients, contact with a trusted physician, documents at 5th grade reading level, and graphic/video decision aids. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02702284, Protocol ID IRB201500776.

An Interprofessional Primary Care-Based Transition of Care Clinic to Reduce Hospital Readmission.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission is a major burden for patients, caregivers, and health systems. Some readmissions may be avoided through timely follow-up in a transition clinic with an interprofessional approach to care. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated a cohort of adults >18 years, n = 203, who are patients of an affiliated academic internal medicine clinic with University of Florida Health and discharged from the hospital between November 1, 2016, and May 1, 2017. We sought to determine if follow-up in an interprofessional transition-of-care (TCM) clinic after discharge was associated with a reduction in hospital readmission when compared to standard follow-up at 30, 60, and 90 days. RESULTS: Follow-up in the TCM clinic was associated with reduced odds of hospital readmission at 90 days by 60%, (odds ratio [OR]: 0.40, P = 0.044, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16-0.97). Although the clinic failed to demonstrate a statistically significant association between clinic follow-up and in readmission at 30 (OR: 0.66, P = 0.36, 95% CI 0.27-1.59) and 60 days (OR: 0.67, P = 0.31, 95% CI 0.31-1.47), fewer readmissions were seen in patients seen by the TCM clinic. CONCLUSIONS: A primary care nested interprofessional transition-of-care clinic was associated with a reduction in hospital readmission.

Patients and Guns: Florida Physicians Are Not Asking.

OBJECTIVES: The number of deaths from gun violence continues to increase in the United States. Despite multiple studies demonstrating that counseling patients leads to safer gun storage, it is not routinely practiced by physicians. There are multiple barriers to discussing firearms with patients. A barrier in Florida, until recently, was a law preventing physicians from asking patients about firearms. The law was overturned in 2017; however, it is unclear whether physicians are aware of this decision. We undertook a survey to study University of Florida faculty physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to discussing firearms safety. METHODS: The survey consisted of 15 questions related to firearms and counseling. Invitations to participate were e-mailed in 2018 to faculty in general internal medicine, emergency medicine, and surgery within our institution. RESULTS: The response rate was 50% (n = 71/142). The majority of faculty surveyed did not own a gun (56%). Ninety-one percent of faculty surveyed agreed that "gun violence is a public health issue" and 93% agreed that gun safety discussion with patients at risk for suicidal or violent behavior is important. More than half of the respondents (62%) believed they could effectively discuss firearms safety with patients; 73% strongly agreed or agreed that they would discuss gun safety with at-risk patients, whereas 27% were either neutral or disagreed. Fewer still (55%) feel comfortable initiating conversations, and only 5% of participants always talk to at-risk patients about gun safety. Twenty-four percent discussed gun safety most of the time, 30% discussed it sometimes, 32% rarely discussed it, and 9% never discussed it; 76% were aware of the 2017 court decision overturning the physician gag law in Florida. The most-often cited barriers to discussions included lack of time (36%), worry about negative reaction from patient (30%), worry about lack of support from administration (13%), and lack of knowledge (20%). Gun owners and nonowners differed significantly on only two survey items: having taken a firearms safety course (gun owners more likely, relative risk 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.16-2.29, P = 0.001) and agreeing with gun violence being a public health issue (gun owners being less likely, relative risk 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.49, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Faculty miss opportunities to prevent gun violence despite acknowledging that it is important to do so. More than 40% of the physicians who were surveyed do not counsel at-risk patients about gun safety, citing a lack of knowledge, a persisting belief that asking patients about guns in Florida is illegal, worry about negative patient reactions, and time limitations. Inaction persists despite increased awareness and activism by physicians regarding gun violence. A wider availability of continuing medical education opportunities to learn about firearms counseling should be considered.

Revisiting patient communication training: an updated needs assessment and the AGENDA model.

OBJECTIVE: To assess physician needs for patient-centered communication training for medical consultations and to develop an updated patient training curriculum. METHODS: An online needs assessment was distributed through physician email listserves at the University of Florida College of Medicine. Frequency tabulation and content analyses were conducted to assess patient communication themes. RESULTS: Responses were received from 336 physicians. Physicians reported that patients are reluctant to ask questions when they do not understand information related to their medical condition, treatment plan, or medical advice. Furthermore, physicians reported that a lack of patient negotiation inhibits patient-centered communication and may negatively influence patient adherence and compliance. Based on these results the AGENDA model was created for patient training and consists of (1) agenda setting; (2) goals for health; (3) expressing concerns, questions, and negotiations; (4) navigating health literacy issues; (5) disclosing detailed information; and (6) active types of listening. CONCLUSION: This study supports revisiting patient communication training and tailoring future training interventions to specific communities. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The AGENDA model can be used to train patients to enhance patient-centered communication with physicians. Additionally, patient communication training could help to address the barriers to care identified by the physicians in our study.

The effect of lecture and a standardized patient encounter on medical student rape myth acceptance and attitudes toward screening patients for a history of sexual assault.

BACKGROUND: Most physicians fail to routinely screen patients for a history of sexual assault. PURPOSES: This study aimed to gauge medical student support for routinely screening patients for a history of sexual assault, examine potential barriers to screening, and determine if attitudes can be changed through educational interventions. METHODS: One hundred three 2nd-year medical students completed a survey before and after a lecture on sexual assault (response rate = 94/103 and 90/103, respectively). The questionnaire was administered a third time following a standardized patient encounter with a female rape victim (response rate = 102/103). RESULTS: Most medical students agreed that patients should be screened for sexual victimization. Students showed low levels of rape myth acceptance. Agreement with rape myths correlated with increased screening hesitancy. Statistically significant gender differences were observed. Following educational sessions, students expressed less rape myth acceptance and more comfort screening. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual assault education can diminish rape myth acceptance and promote screening for sexual assault.