HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Online-Only Appendix All Versions of this Article: dc07-1365v1 31/4/667    most recent Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hill-Briggs, F. Articles by Smith, A. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hill-Briggs, F. Articles by Smith, A. S. Social Bookmarking                What's this?

Evaluation of Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Print Patient Education Materials for Use with Low Health Literate Populations

¹Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
²Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology, and Clinical Research
³Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

fbriggs3{at}jhmi.edu

ABSTRACT

Objective: Populations with the lowest literacy and health literacy in the United States are also among those disproportionately burdened by diabetes and its complications. Yet, suitability of publicly available diabetes and CVD patient education materials for these patients is not clear. We evaluated selected American Diabetes Association (ADA) and American Heart Association (AHA) print education materials for accessibility and usability characteristics.

Research Design and Methods: English language, print patient education brochures addressing lifestyle/behavioral management of diabetes and CVD were obtained from ADA (n=21) and AHA (n=19). Materials were evaluated using 32 criteria, 23 addressing literacy demand and 9 addressing behavioral activation, compiled from authoritative sources on development of low literacy consumer health information.

Results: Of the 32 criteria identified by two or more sources, ADA materials consistently met 11 (34%), and AHA materials consistently met 8 (25%). Criteria most frequently achieved were: text case, use of cues (e.g. bullets) to emphasize key points, design of graphics/illustrations, some provision of "how to" information, and positive depiction of cultural images. Criteria least consistently achieved were reading grade, word usage (e.g. scientific jargon), sentence length, font size, line length, white space, visual organization, limited scope, clear and specific (e.g. step-by-step) behavioral recommendations, and demonstration of audience relevance and cultural appropriateness.

Conclusions: Materials consistently met few criteria for usability by patients with low literacy, limited prior medical knowledge, and/or limited resource availability. Use of available criteria and methods for increasing reach of print education materials to these underserved patient populations is indicated.

CiteULike    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?