Strengthening the Case for Universal Health Literacy: The Dispersion of Health Literacy Experiences Across a Southern U.S. State.

BACKGROUND: How individuals perceive their health literacy may differ based on demographic and individual characteristics. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to understand the dispersion of health literacy across demographics in the state of Georgia in 2021 and to determine which factors influence health literacy. METHODS: Study participants were age 18 years and older and completed an on-line Health Literacy Questionnaire (N = 520). The participant pool was stratified to mirror state-wide demographics of geography and race. Results were further collapsed into composite scales reflecting basic, communicative, and critical health literacy. Descriptive statistics, bivariate Pearson's correlations, and multiple regression analyses were used. A two-step cluster analysis was performed with the nine health literacy scales. KEY RESULTS: Rural county and no health insurance were negatively related to all three composite scales (rs = .093-.254, ps < .05). Demographic predictors accounted for 6.7% of the variance in basic (F[6, 439] = 5.287, p < .001), 10% in communicative (F[6, 438] = 8.154, p < .001), and 6% for critical (F[6, 439] = 4.675, p < .0010. In all scales, health insurance status was the strongest primary unique predictor (ßs = .236, .295, .181, ps <.05, respectively). In a two-step cluster analysis only health insurance status differentiated the health literacy level clusters (X2(3) = 9.43, 34.51, ps = 024, <.001 respectively). CONCLUSION: Lacking health insurance is the most consistent and largest contributor to low health literacy across the state of Georgia; population demographics are not. Health literacy policies and practices should be developed for universal application and not focus on specific populations. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2022;6(3):e182-e190.] Plain Language Summary: In this study, demographics that are usually associated with low health literacy like age, sex, race, educational attainment, and type of county (rural or urban) were not associated with; the only significant factor was lack of health insurance. This relationship strengthens the case for universal health literacy precautions that go beyond population demographics.

Strengthening Culturally Competent Health Communication.

Vulnerable refugee communities are disproportionately affected by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic; existing longstanding health inequity in these communities is exacerbated by ineffective risk communication practices about COVID-19. Culturally and linguistically appropriate health communication following health literacy guidelines is needed to dispel cultural myths, social stigma, misinformation, and disinformation. For refugee communities, the physical, mental, and social-related consequences of displacement further complicate understanding of risk communication practices grounded in a Western cultural ethos. We present a case study of Clarkston, Georgia, the "most diverse square mile in America," where half the population is foreign born and majority refugee. Supporting marginalized communities in times of risk will require a multipronged, systemic approach to health communication including: (1) creating a task force of local leaders and community members to deal with emergent issues; (2) expanding English-language education and support for refugees; (3) including refugee perspectives on risk, health, and wellness into risk communication messaging; (4) improving cultural competence and health literacy training for community leaders and healthcare providers; and (5) supporting community health workers. Finally, better prepared public health programs, including partnerships with trusted community organizations and leadership, can ensure that appropriate and supportive risk communication and health education and promotion are in place long before the next emergency.

Perception Versus Reality: The Use of Teach Back by Medical Residents.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers (HCPs) may ask patients if they understand their diagnosis or instructions during clinic visits; patients often simply say yes. However, many patients leave with little idea of their medication and discharge instructions. Teach Back (TB) is a patient-centered health-literate technique that allows HCPs to confirm patient understanding during clinic visits. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to determine a relationship between perception and actual use of TB by medical residents in primary care outpatient clinics (providers, N = 16; clinic visits, N = 80) and, if the observed rate of TB was discordant with perception, did a TB skills training intervention have any impact on use of TB (clinic visit, N = 78). We were also interested in language used during TB and if use of TB was related to patient demographics or health literacy level. METHODS: Medical residents' perception was measured using the "Always Use Teach-Back Confidence and Conviction Scale" (N = 16). Clinic visits were audiotaped and scored for use of TB (pre-intervention, N = 80; post-intervention, N =78). The intervention was a 1-hour TB skills training course. Content analysis was performed to understand the use of TB language. KEY RESULTS: Despite the high level of confidence/conviction about TB (r[16] = .669, p <. 05) TB was only used twice out of 80 visits during pre-intervention clinic visits. During post-intervention, use of TB increased to 41 times by 10 residents (c2[1, N = 16] = 6.533, p <. 05). TB language after the intervention was more collaborative; there was a relationship between gender and use of TB. CONCLUSION: Results from our pilot study identified three important observations that may be critical to improving health-literate physician communication: residents believe they are using TB in the clinic for many patients; use of TB was discordantly low at 2.5%; and a single 1-hour skills training intervention dramatically increased TB use to 53%. Residents used patient-centered TB language after the training intervention. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2019;3(2):e117-e126.]. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Medical residents believe they are using Teach Back to confirm patient understanding in the clinic 60% of the time when they actually used Teach Back only 2.5% of the time. After an educational intervention, they used Teach Back 53% of the time; Teach-Back language was collaborative and patient-centered, and all but two patients confirmed their medication and discharge plan.