BACKGROUND: Limited health literacy is associated with higher rates of hospitalization. However, the prevalence and etiology of limited health literacy among hospitalized adults and the compensatory strategies used are not known. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence and demographic associations of limited health literacy in hospitalized patients and to identify the perceived etiology and use of any compensatory strategies. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was implemented of a consecutive sample of hospitalized adults admitted to the Internal Medicine Hospitalist Service at a 440-bed academic medical center (n = 103) in Vermont. Health literacy was determined using the short form of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults. Demographic data, perceived etiology of difficulties in reading or understanding health information, and use of compensatory strategies were self-reported. RESULTS: Sixty percent of medical inpatients have limited health literacy. Thirty-six percent of patients with limited health literacy attribute this to difficulties with vision. Sixty-two percent of all medical inpatients rely on help from a health professional, and 23% look to a family member when faced with challenges in reading or understanding health information. DISCUSSION: The prevalence of limited health literacy is high in hospitalized medical patients. Further study of the timing and methods of communicating information to hospitalized patients is warranted. Assuring that the patient and/or family understand the postdischarge plans will be an important step to improving quality and safety.
BACKGROUND: Limited health literacy is associated with higher rates of hospitalization. However, the prevalence and etiology of limited health literacy among hospitalized adults and the compensatory strategies used are not known. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence and demographic associations of limited health literacy in hospitalized patients and to identify the perceived etiology and use of any compensatory strategies. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was implemented of a consecutive sample of hospitalized adults admitted to the Internal Medicine Hospitalist Service at a 440-bed academic medical center (n = 103) in Vermont. Health literacy was determined using the short form of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults. Demographic data, perceived etiology of difficulties in reading or understanding health information, and use of compensatory strategies were self-reported. RESULTS: Sixty percent of medical inpatients have limited health literacy. Thirty-six percent of patients with limited health literacy attribute this to difficulties with vision. Sixty-two percent of all medical inpatients rely on help from a health professional, and 23% look to a family member when faced with challenges in reading or understanding health information. DISCUSSION: The prevalence of limited health literacy is high in hospitalized medical patients. Further study of the timing and methods of communicating information to hospitalized patients is warranted. Assuring that the patient and/or family understand the postdischarge plans will be an important step to improving quality and safety.
Authors: David W Baker; Julie A Gazmararian; Mark V Williams; Tracy Scott; Ruth M Parker; Diane Green; Junling Ren; Jennifer Peel Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: S P Kim; S J Knight; C Tomori; K M Colella; R A Schoor; L Shih; T M Kuzel; R B Nadler; C L Bennett Journal: Cancer Invest Date: 2001 Impact factor: 2.176
Authors: Stacy T Lindau; Cecilia Tomori; Tom Lyons; Lizbet Langseth; Charles L Bennett; Patricia Garcia Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: J A Gazmararian; D W Baker; M V Williams; R M Parker; T L Scott; D C Green; S N Fehrenbach; J Ren; J P Koplan Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-02-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Dean Schillinger; Kevin Grumbach; John Piette; Frances Wang; Dennis Osmond; Carolyn Daher; Jorge Palacios; Gabriela Diaz Sullivan; Andrew B Bindman Journal: JAMA Date: 2002 Jul 24-31 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lindsay C Kobayashi; Jane Wardle; Michael S Wolf; Christian von Wagner Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2014-12-11 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Daniel Semakula; Allen Nsangi; Matt Oxman; Astrid Austvoll-Dahlgren; Sarah Rosenbaum; Margaret Kaseje; Laetitia Nyirazinyoye; Atle Fretheim; Iain Chalmers; Andrew D Oxman; Nelson K Sewankambo Journal: Trials Date: 2017-01-21 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Benjamin L Cook; Ye Wang; Rajan Sonik; Susan Busch; Nicholas Carson; Ana M Progovac; Alan M Zaslavsky Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 3.402