Literature DB >> 21743339

Assessment of commonly available education materials in heart failure clinics.

Kimberli Taylor-Clarke1, Queen Henry-Okafor, Clare Murphy, Madeline Keyes, Russell Rothman, Andre Churchwell, George A Mensah, Douglas Sawyer, Uchechukwu K A Sampson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health literacy (HL) is an established independent predictor of cardiovascular outcomes. Approximately 90 million Americans have limited HL and read at the fifth grade level or lower. Therefore, we sought to determine the suitability and readability level of common cardiovascular patient education materials (PEM) related to heart failure and heart-healthy lifestyle. METHODS AND
RESULTS: The suitability and readability of written PEMs were assessed using the suitability assessment of materials (SAM) and Fry readability formula. The SAM criteria are composed of the following categories: message content, text appearance, visuals, and layout and design. We obtained a convenience sample of 18 English-written cardiovascular PEMs freely available from major health organizations. Two reviewers independently appraised the PEMs. Final suitability scores ranged from 12% to 87%. Readability levels ranged between 3rd and 15th grade level; the average readability level was 8th grade. Ninety-four percent of the PEMs were rated either superior or adequate on text appearance, but 50% or more of the PEMs were rated inadequate on each of the other categories of the SAM criteria. Only 2 (11%) PEMs had the optimum suitability score of 70% or higher and 5th grade or lower readability level suitable for populations with limited HL.
CONCLUSIONS: Commonly available cardiovascular PEMs used by some major healthcare institutions are not suitable for the average American patient. The true prevalence of suboptimal PEMs needs to be determined because it potentially negatively impacts optimal healthcare delivery and outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 21743339      PMCID: PMC4007697          DOI: 10.1097/JCN.0b013e318220720c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cardiovasc Nurs        ISSN: 0889-4655            Impact factor:   2.083


  20 in total

1.  Suitability of prostate cancer education materials: applying a standardized assessment tool to currently available materials.

Authors:  Debra Weintraub; Sally L Maliski; Arlene Fink; Sarah Choe; Mark S Litwin
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2004-11

Review 2.  Literacy and health outcomes.

Authors:  N D Berkman; D A Dewalt; M P Pignone; S L Sheridan; K N Lohr; L Lux; S F Sutton; T Swinson; A J Bonito
Journal:  Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ)       Date:  2004-01

3.  Effects of health literacy on health status and health service utilization amongst the elderly.

Authors:  Young Ik Cho; Shoou-Yih D Lee; Ahsan M Arozullah; Kathleen S Crittenden
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  A new readability yardstick.

Authors:  R FLESCH
Journal:  J Appl Psychol       Date:  1948-06

5.  Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit.

Authors:  J Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1968-10       Impact factor: 17.737

6.  Analysis of stroke patients' and carers' reading ability and the content and design of written materials: recommendations for improving written stroke information.

Authors:  Tammy Hoffmann; Kryss McKenna
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2005-08-10

7.  State of disparities in cardiovascular health in the United States.

Authors:  George A Mensah; Ali H Mokdad; Earl S Ford; Kurt J Greenlund; Janet B Croft
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2005-03-15       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  Evaluation of diabetes and cardiovascular disease print patient education materials for use with low-health literate populations.

Authors:  Felicia Hill-Briggs; Andrea S Smith
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2008-01-17       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 9.  The impact of health literacy on cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Richard S Safeer; Catherine E Cooke; Jann Keenan
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2006

Review 10.  The costs of limited health literacy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Klaus Eichler; Simon Wieser; Urs Brügger
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2009-07-31       Impact factor: 3.380

View more
  11 in total

1.  Readability of patient education materials available at the point of care.

Authors:  Lauren M Stossel; Nora Segar; Peter Gliatto; Robert Fallar; Reena Karani
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Health Literacy Predicts Morbidity and Mortality in Rural Patients With Heart Failure.

Authors:  Debra K Moser; Susan Robinson; Martha J Biddle; Michele M Pelter; Thomas S Nesbitt; Jeffery Southard; Lawton Cooper; Kathleen Dracup
Journal:  J Card Fail       Date:  2015-04-20       Impact factor: 5.712

Review 3.  The American Heart Association Heart Failure Summit, Bethesda, April 12, 2017.

Authors:  Pamela N Peterson; Larry A Allen; Paul A Heidenreich; Nancy M Albert; Ileana L Piña
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 8.790

Review 4.  Education material for heart failure patients: what works and what does not?

Authors:  Mary Boyde; Robyn Peters
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2014-09

5.  Evaluation of patient education materials: the example of circulating cell free DNA testing for aneuploidy.

Authors:  Edward M Kloza; Paula K Haddow; Jacquelyn V Halliday; Barbara M O'Brien; Geralyn M Lambert-Messerlian; Glenn E Palomaki
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Assessment of printed patient-educational materials for chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Delphine S Tuot; Elizabeth Davis; Alexandra Velasquez; Tanushree Banerjee; Neil R Powe
Journal:  Am J Nephrol       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 3.754

Review 7.  Readability of patient education materials in ophthalmology: a single-institution study and systematic review.

Authors:  Andrew M Williams; Kelly W Muir; Jullia A Rosdahl
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 2.209

8.  Is content really king? An objective analysis of the public's response to medical videos on YouTube.

Authors:  Tejas Desai; Afreen Shariff; Vibhu Dhingra; Deeba Minhas; Megan Eure; Mark Kats
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Challenges When Translating and Culturally Adapting a Measurement Instrument: The Suitability and Comprehensibility of Materials (SAM+CAM).

Authors:  Catarina Wallengren; Kristina Rosengren; Richard Sawatzky; Joakim Ohlen
Journal:  Glob Qual Nurs Res       Date:  2018-10-31

10.  Readability in printed education materials for Chinese patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a mixed-method design.

Authors:  Qiuyi Wang; Lunfang Xie; Lei Wang; Xing Li; Liangmei Xu; Peiling Chen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.