Every Second Patient Does Not Fully Understand Written Preprocedure Information: An Explorative Study About Functional Health Literacy

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jopan.2024.02.004
Emelie Janmyr CRNA, MSN , Benjamin Grossmann CRNA, PhD , Andreas Nilsson CRNA, PhD
{"title":"Every Second Patient Does Not Fully Understand Written Preprocedure Information: An Explorative Study About Functional Health Literacy","authors":"Emelie Janmyr CRNA, MSN ,&nbsp;Benjamin Grossmann CRNA, PhD ,&nbsp;Andreas Nilsson CRNA, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jopan.2024.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To investigate the self-perceived functional health literacy (FHL) of patients who underwent advanced endoscopic treatment, explore whether FHL could explain aspects of patients' perioperative experiences, and determine whether patients read the provided patient information.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A prospective cross-sectional explorative study.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>One hundred patients who underwent endoscopic bile duct intervention were enrolled and asked to answer the Swedish version of the FHL Scale and their perioperative experiences of the intervention. Along with procedural data, all data were analyzed for group comparisons; high or low FHL.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>The study included a total of 100 patients, with half of them rating their FHL as problematic or inadequate (low FHL). Among those who perceived their FHL as inadequate, a majority had not read the provided information before the procedure. Patients with problematic or inadequate FHL experienced perioperative anxiety and pain more frequently than those with sufficient FHL (high FHL).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This study supports previous research on the association between low FHL and patients' well-being. To better meet patients' information needs, it is crucial for nurse anesthetists and other health care providers to have knowledge about FHL. Additionally, the study highlights the importance of using alternative and more effective means of delivering information to patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49028,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing","volume":"39 6","pages":"Pages 1075-1078"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1089947224000509","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the self-perceived functional health literacy (FHL) of patients who underwent advanced endoscopic treatment, explore whether FHL could explain aspects of patients' perioperative experiences, and determine whether patients read the provided patient information.

Design

A prospective cross-sectional explorative study.

Methods

One hundred patients who underwent endoscopic bile duct intervention were enrolled and asked to answer the Swedish version of the FHL Scale and their perioperative experiences of the intervention. Along with procedural data, all data were analyzed for group comparisons; high or low FHL.

Findings

The study included a total of 100 patients, with half of them rating their FHL as problematic or inadequate (low FHL). Among those who perceived their FHL as inadequate, a majority had not read the provided information before the procedure. Patients with problematic or inadequate FHL experienced perioperative anxiety and pain more frequently than those with sufficient FHL (high FHL).

Conclusions

This study supports previous research on the association between low FHL and patients' well-being. To better meet patients' information needs, it is crucial for nurse anesthetists and other health care providers to have knowledge about FHL. Additionally, the study highlights the importance of using alternative and more effective means of delivering information to patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
每两名患者中就有一人没有完全理解书面的术前信息:关于功能性健康素养的探索性研究。
目的:调查接受晚期内窥镜治疗的患者自我感觉的功能性健康素养(FHL),探讨FHL能否解释患者围手术期经历的某些方面,并确定患者是否阅读了所提供的患者信息:前瞻性横断面探索研究:方法:100 名接受内镜胆管介入治疗的患者被纳入研究,并被要求回答瑞典语版 FHL 量表及其介入治疗的围手术期经历。除了手术数据外,还对所有数据进行了分组比较分析;高或低 FHL:研究共包括 100 名患者,其中半数患者认为他们的 FHL 存在问题或不足(低 FHL)。在那些认为自己FHL不足的患者中,大多数人在手术前没有阅读过所提供的信息。与FHL充足(FHL高)的患者相比,FHL有问题或不足的患者更经常出现围术期焦虑和疼痛:本研究支持以往关于低 FHL 与患者健康之间关系的研究。为了更好地满足患者的信息需求,麻醉护士和其他医疗服务提供者必须掌握有关 FHL 的知识。此外,该研究还强调了使用其他更有效的方法向患者提供信息的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
17.60%
发文量
279
审稿时长
90 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing provides original, peer-reviewed research for a primary audience that includes nurses in perianesthesia settings, including ambulatory surgery, preadmission testing, postanesthesia care (Phases I and II), extended observation, and pain management. The Journal provides a forum for sharing professional knowledge and experience relating to management, ethics, legislation, research, and other aspects of perianesthesia nursing.
期刊最新文献
Comprehensive Perioperative Management of PFAPA Syndrome: Insights From Clinical Cases. The Effect of Preoperative Tele-nursing Counseling on Anxiety and Patient Satisfaction in Day Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Health Literacy of General Surgery Patients: A Cross-sectional Study. Pharmacological Strategies for Postdischarge Nausea and Vomiting: Evidence-based Review Update. The Effect of Cold Spray Applied Before Local Anesthesia on Anxiety and Pain in Coronary Angiography Procedure: A Randomized Controlled Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1