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
Review
. 2020 Feb 26;17(5):1513.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph17051513.

The Evidence-Based Development of an Intervention to Improve Clinical Health Literacy Practice

Affiliations
Review

The Evidence-Based Development of an Intervention to Improve Clinical Health Literacy Practice

Gill Rowlands et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Abstract

Low health literacy is an issue with high prevalence in the UK and internationally. It has a social gradient with higher prevalence in lower social groups and is linked with higher rates of long-term health conditions, lower self-rated health, and greater difficulty self-managing long-term health conditions. Improved medical services and practitioner awareness of a patient's health literacy can help to address these issues. An intervention was developed to improve General Practitioner and Practice Nurse health literacy skills and practice. A feasibility study was undertaken to examine and improve the elements of the intervention. The intervention had two parts: educating primary care doctors and nurses about identifying and enhancing health literacy (patient capacity to get hold of, understand and apply information for health) to improve their health literacy practice, and implementation of on-screen 'pop-up' notifications that alerted General Practitioners (GPs) and nurses when seeing a patient at risk of low health literacy. Rapid reviews of the literature were undertaken to optimise the intervention. Four General Practices were recruited, and the intervention was then applied to doctors and nurses through training followed by alerts via the practice clinical IT system. After the intervention, focus groups were held with participating practitioners and a patient and carer group to further develop the intervention. The rapid literature reviews identified (i) key elements for effectiveness of doctors and nurse training including multi-component training, role-play, learner reflection, and identification of barriers to changing practice and (ii) key elements for effectiveness of alerts on clinical computer systems including 'stand-alone' notification, automatically generated and prominent display of advice, linkage with practitioner education, and use of notifications within a targeted environment. The findings from the post-hoc focus groups indicated that practitioner awareness and skills had improved as a result of the training and that the clinical alerts reminded them to incorporate this into their clinical practice. Suggested improvements to the training included more information on health literacy and how the clinical alerts were generated, and more practical role playing including initiating discussions on health literacy with patients. It was suggested that the wording of the clinical alert be improved to emphasise its purpose in improving practitioner skills. The feasibility study improved the intervention, increasing its potential usefulness and acceptability in clinical practice. Future studies will explore the impact on clinical care through a pilot and a randomised controlled trial.

Keywords: feasibility study; health literacy; intervention; primary care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure A1
Figure A1
Flow chart for the rapid review of health professional training shown to improve clinical practice.
Figure A2
Figure A2
Flow chart for the rapid review of factors facilitating the impact of clinical system alerts on clinical practice.

References

    1. Sorensen K., Van den Broucke S., Fullam J., Doyle G., Pelikan J., Slonska Z., Brand H., Consortium Health Literacy Project European Health literacy and public health: A systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:80. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-80. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nutbeam D. Health literacy as a public health goal: A challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21st century. Health Promot. Int. 2000;15:259–267. doi: 10.1093/heapro/15.3.259. - DOI
    1. Berkman N.D., Sheridan S.L., Donahue K.E., Halpern D.J., Viera A., Crotty K., Viswanathan M. Health Literacy Interventions and Outcomes: An Updated Systematic Review. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Rockville, MD, USA: 2011. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sorensen K., Pelikan J.M., Rothlin F., Ganahl K., Slonska Z., Doyle G., Fullam J., Kondilis B., Agrafiotis D., Uiters E., et al. Health literacy in Europe: Comparative results of the European health literacy survey (HLS-EU) Eur. J. Public Health. 2015;25:1053–1058. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv043. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rowlands G., Protheroe J., Winkley J., Richardson M., Seed P.T., Rudd R. A mismatch between population health literacy and the complexity of health information: An observational study. Br. J. Gen. Pract. 2015;65:e379–e386. doi: 10.3399/bjgp15X685285. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types