Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec;68(677):e869-e876.
doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X699773. Epub 2018 Oct 22.

Effectiveness of health education materials in general practice waiting rooms: a cross-sectional study

Katherine Maskell  1 , Paula McDonald  2 , Priyamvada Paudyal  1
Affiliations

Effectiveness of health education materials in general practice waiting rooms: a cross-sectional study

Katherine Maskell et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Health education materials (HEMs) are widely used in general practice. However, there is little information on the variety of HEMs currently available to patients in the UK, or their preferences for accessing educational materials.

Aim: To assess patients' perceptions of HEMs, and the variety and accessibility of these materials.

Design and setting: Cross-sectional study conducted in general practices in Brighton and Hove.

Method: An anonymous questionnaire was distributed to patients in the waiting room (WR). Additionally, an audit was conducted to measure the variety of the HEMs. Results were analysed using binary multiple logistic regression.

Results: In all, 556 participants (response rate 83.1%) from 19 practices took part. The mean age of participants was 49.3 years (SD ±18.9) and 63% were female. Perceived usefulness of HEMs was associated with reading in the WR using written HEMs, and not having a university degree; noticeability was associated with reading in the WR, and being female; attractiveness was associated with not having a university degree and shorter waiting time. On average, WRs contained 72 posters covering 23 topics, and 53 leaflets covering 24 topics, with many outdated and poorly presented materials of limited accessibility.

Conclusion: This study found substantial variation in the amount, topicality, and quality of material available in WRs. As most patients notice HEMs and find them useful, available technology could be better utilised to widen access to HEMs. The introduction of wireless free internet (Wi-Fi) to waiting rooms should provide an opportunity to update this area.

Keywords: general practice; health education; patient education; patient information; waiting room.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Word cloud displaying topics of health education materials on posters.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Word cloud displaying topics of health education materials on leaflets.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Word cloud displaying topics of health education materials on television screens.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Oermann MH. Effects of educational intervention in waiting room on patient satisfaction. J Ambul Care Manage. 2003;26(2):150–158. - PubMed
    1. Friedman AJ, Cosby R, Boyko S, et al. Effective teaching strategies and methods of delivery for patient education: a systematic review and practice guideline recommendations. J Cancer Educ. 2011;26(1):12–21. - PubMed
    1. Wegwarth O, Kurzenhauser-Carstens S, Gigerenzer G. Overcoming the knowledge–behavior gap: the effect of evidence-based HPV vaccination leaflets on understanding, intention, and actual vaccination decision. Vaccine. 2014;32(12):1388–1393. - PubMed
    1. de Haan MC, de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop E, et al. Informed decision-making in colorectal cancer screening using colonoscopy or CT-colonography. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;91(3):318–325. - PubMed
    1. van Agt HM, Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot ML. Interventions to enhance informed choices among invitees of screening programmes — a systematic review. Eur J Public Health. 2014;24(5):789–801. - PubMed