Promoting health literacy by using the Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkits: A reflection study
Promoción de la alfabetización sanitaria basado en los Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkits: Un estudio de reflexión
Promoção do letramento em saúde segundo os Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkits: Um estudo de reflexão
Maria Meimei Brevidelli; Veronica Paula Torel de Moura; Edvane Birelo Lopes De Domenico
Abstract
Objectives: To describe the Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkits document and reflect on its applicability in promoting health literacy in different contexts.
Method: This is a reflection that synthesizes the dimensions and action strategies, as well as presents a summary of the implications for clinical practice.
Results: The toolkits are organized into five dimensions: preparation for improvement, verbal communication, written communication, self-management and empowerment, and support systems. Each dimension is subdivided into 21 tools, accompanied by their respective action strategies. Studies on the applicability of these toolkits in clinical practice indicate a preference for more concise and easy-to-use instruments, and also reveal that implementing changes took more time than originally anticipated. Identified limitations include the need for planning, reorganization of the physical environment, adjustment of service flow, and training of the staff in communication skills.
Final considerations and implications for practice: The value of this framework lies in the collection of evidence-based recommendations that can be used to promote effective interactions with health care users.
Keywords
Resumen
Palabras clave
Resumo
Objetivos: Descrever os Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkits e refletir sobre sua aplicabilidade para promover o letramento em saúde em diferentes contextos.
Método: Trata-se de uma reflexão que sintetiza as dimensões e estratégias de ação, além de apresentar uma síntese das implicações para a prática clínica.
Resultados: Os kits estão organizados em cinco dimensões: preparação para melhorias, comunicação verbal, comunicação escrita, autogerenciamento e empoderamento, e sistemas de suporte. Cada dimensão é subdividida em 21 ferramentas, acompanhadas de suas respectivas estratégias de ação. Estudos sobre a aplicabilidade desses kits na prática clínica indicam uma preferência por instrumentos mais concisos e de fácil utilização, além de apontarem que a implementação de mudanças demandou mais tempo do que o inicialmente previsto. Entre as limitações identificadas estão a necessidade de planejamento, reorganização da estrutura física do ambiente, ajuste no fluxo de atendimento, e capacitação da equipe em habilidades de comunicação.
Considerações finais e implicações para prática: Destaca-se que o valor desse referencial reside na reunião de recomendações baseadas em evidências científicas, que podem ser utilizadas para promover interações eficazes com os usuários dos serviços de saúde.
Palavras-chave
Referências
1 Bastable SB, Gonzales KM. Overview of education in health care. In: Bastable SB, editor. Essentials of patient education. 4th ed. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2017. p. 10-2.
2 World Health Organization. Health promotion glossary of terms 2021. Geneva: WHO; 2021.
3 Cutilli CC. Excellence in patient education: evidence-based education that “sticks” and improves patient outcomes. Nurs Clin North Am. 2020;55(2):267-82.
4 Heine M, Lategan F, Erasmus M, Lombaard CM, Mc Carthy N, Olivier J et al. Health education interventions to promote health literacy in adults with selected non‐communicable diseases living in low‐to‐middle income countries: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Eval Clin Pract. 2021;27(6):1417-28.
5 Alsaedi R, McKeirnan K. Literature review of type 2 diabetes management and health literacy. Diabetes Spectr. 2021;34(4):399-406.
6 Koh HK, Brach C, Harris LM, Parchman ML. A proposed “Health Literate Care Model” would constitute a systems approach to improving patients’ engagement in care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 fev;32(2):357-67.
7 Caballero A. Addressing health literacy as a foundation for effective and equitable health communication. J Consum Health Internet. 2021 abr 3;25(2):205-16.
8 Hoffmann T, Worrall L. Designing effective written health education materials: considerations for health professionals. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26(19):1166-73.
9 Tian C, Champlin S, Mackert M, Lazard A, Agrawal D. Readability, suitability, and health content assessment of web-based patient education materials on colorectal cancer screening. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80(2):284-90.
10 Keçeci A, Toprak S, Kiliç S. How effective are patient education materials in educating patients? Clin Nurs Res. 2019;28(5):567-82.
11 Lipari M, Berlie H, Saleh Y, Hang P, Moser L. Understandability, actionability, and readability of online patient education materials about diabetes mellitus. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019;76(3):182-6.
12 Szabó P, Bíró É, Kósa K. Readability and comprehension of printed patient education materials. Front Public Health. 2021;9:725840.
13 Brega AG, Barnard J, Mabachi NM, Weiss BD, DeWalt DA, Brach C et al. AHRQ health literacy universal precautions toolkit. 2nd ed. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2015.
14 DeWalt DA, Broucksou KA, Hawk V, Brach C, Hink A, Rudd R et al. Developing and testing the health literacy universal precautions toolkit. Nurs Outlook. 2011;59(2):85-94.
15 Mabachi NM, Cifuentes M, Barnard J, Brega AG, Albright K, Weiss BD et al. Demonstration of the Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit: Lessons for quality improvement. J Ambul Care Manage. 2016;39(3):199-208.
16 Dartiguelongue JB, Cafiero PJ. Communication in health care teams. Arch Argent Pediatr. 2021 Dec;119(6):e589-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.5546/aap.2021.eng.e589.
17 Dehghani A, Ghomian Z, Rakhshanderou S, Khankeh H, Kavousi A. Process and components of disaster risk communication in health systems: a thematic analysis. Jamba. 2022 dez 8;14(1):1367.
18 World Health Organization. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2014 [Internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2014 [citado 2020 ago 20]. Disponível em:
19 Allegrante JP, Wells MT, Peterson JC. Interventions to support behavioral self-management of chronic diseases. Annu Rev Public Health. 2019 abr 1;40(1):127-46.
20 Iriarte E, Cianelli R, Fernandez-Pineda M. Multilevel self-management in nursing research: an approach to decrease health disparities in chronic diseases. Invest Educ Enferm. 2023;41(2):e10.
21 Kärner Köhler A, Tingström P, Jaarsma T, Nilsson S. Patient empowerment and general self-efficacy in patients with coronary heart disease: a cross-sectional study. BMC Fam Pract. 2018 maio 30;19(1):76.
22 Uhm JY, Kim MS. Online social support and collective empowerment: Serial mediation effect on self-efficacy among mothers of children with type 1 diabetes. J Adv Nurs. 2022 out;78(10):3225-34.
23 Dinh TTH, Bonner A. Exploring the relationships between health literacy, social support, self-efficacy and self-management in adults with multiple chronic diseases. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 ago 30;23(1):923.
24 Rudd RE. Guidelines for creating materials. Resources for development and assessing materials. Health literacy studies [Internet]. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health; 2020 [citado 2020 ago 20]. Disponível em:
25 Brega AG, Freedman MA, LeBlanc WG, Barnard J, Mabachi NM, Cifuentes M, et al. Using the health literacy universal precautions toolkit to improve the quality of patient materials. J Health Commun 2015, 20(suppl 2), 69-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2015.1081997. PMid:26513033.
26 Shoemaker SJ, Wolf MS, Brach C. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;96(3):395-403.
27 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC Clear Communication Index. A Tool for Developing and Assessing CDC Public Communication Products User Guide. USA: USA Department of Health and Human Service, CDC Office of the Associate Director for Communication; 2019.
28 Shoemaker SJ, Wolf MS, Brach C. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and user’s guide (Version 1.0). Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014.
29 Cifuentes M, Brega AG, Barnard J, Mabachi NM, Albright K, Weiss BD, et al. Guide to Implementing the Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2015.
30 Lian L, Brach C. Health Literacy Universal Precautions are still a distant dream: analysis of U.S. data on health literate practices. Health Lit Res Pract. 2017;1(4):e216-30. http://doi.org/10.3928/24748307-20170929-01. PMid:29202120.
31 Brooks C, Ballinger C, Nutbeam D, Mander C, Adams J. Nursing, and allied health professionals’ views about using health literacy screening tools and a universal precautions approach to communication with older adults: a qualitative study. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;42(13):1819-25.
32 Brach C, Borsky A. How the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Promotes Health Literate Health Care. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2020 jun 25;269:313-23. http://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI200046. PMid:32594006.
33 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The SHARE approach: a model for shared decision making [Internet]. Rockville: AHRQ; 2016. No. 14-0034-1-EF. [citado 2020 ago 20]. Disponível em:
Submetido em:
16/02/2024
Aceito em:
21/07/2024
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email