ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate health literacy (HL) interventions in chronic conditions by exploring theoretical perspectives, intervention content and effectiveness. METHOD: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, Web of Science and PsycINFO. Standardised systematic review methods were used, and sequences informing our research question were extracted and analysed. The study includes a descriptive summary of the included papers. RESULTS: We included 39 unique interventions, with diabetes and heart disease as the most targeted chronic conditions. Fifty-four percent of papers included a definition of HL, but the studies showed significant heterogeneity of theoretical underpinnings, modes, measures and content. We identified 23 HL measures, mostly assessing functional HL. The HL interventions were often more complex than the measures indicated. A significant change in HL was found in 28 studies. Study quality was generally poor. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions optimizing HL appear important to improve health outcomes in chronic conditions. To ensure cumulative knowledge development of this field we need theory-based interventions, consistency in methods and more tailored and comprehensive measures to capture the interventions' complexity. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A more valid understanding of HL interventions and measurements is needed to reach an agreed understanding of their components and intentions.
Subject(s)
Health Literacy , Chronic Disease , Health Literacy/methods , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Nurses' strategies regarding patient education should be informed by the best available research evidence. Clinical nurses play an essential role in implementing new patient education programmes for renal transplant recipients. AIM: This study investigated transplant nurse job satisfaction, competence, training and perceptions of quality of care in relation to the implementation of a new, evidence-based, patient education programme. This paper reports the results from the first part of an implementation study. METHODS: Data were collected in the form of a survey from 50 clinical transplant nurses at a single national transplant centre in Norway in 2015, six months after the patient education programme was implemented. A descriptive, cross-sectional design was used. RESULTS: Seventy-two percent of the respondents reported that they had sufficient knowledge about the new programme; 54.4 % stated that the new programme resulted in renal transplant recipients being better educated. The new programme was found to be more structured, patient-centered and visible for the nurses across the wards, as compared with their previous practice. Nurses with less nursing experience were significantly more motivated about the new patient education programme, than the more experienced nurses (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Nurses were generally satisfied with their new patient education practice. Knowledge derived from the research evidence on patient education was found to be valuable and transferable to everyday clinical nursing practice.
