4.5 Article

Functional, communicative and critical health literacy of chronic disease patients and their importance for self-management

Journal

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
Volume 98, Issue 1, Pages 41-48

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.10.006

Keywords

Health literacy; Self-management; Chronic illness; Self-management support

Funding

  1. Netherlands Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports
  2. Netherlands Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To provide insight into the level of health literacy among chronic disease patients in the Netherlands, to identify subgroups with low literacy and to examine the associations between health literacy and self-management. Methods: Self-report questionnaires were sent to a nationwide sample of 1.341 chronic disease patients. The Dutch Functional Communicative and Critical Health Literacy scale (FCCHL), the Partners in Health scale (PIH) and Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Doctor Interactions (PEPPI-5) were used to assess health literacy and aspects of self-management. Results: In general, health literacy skills were good. A higher age, lower education, lower income, multi-morbidity and/or functional limitations were associated with lower levels of health literacy. Communicative and critical health literacy were related to some aspects of self-management but not to all. Functional health literacy was less important. Conclusion: Communicative and critical health literacy play a role in successful self-management of chronic disease but the impact differs by context. Health literacy levels vary according to socio-demographic and disease characteristics of patients. Practice implications: Health care professionals should tailor their information and support to the health literacy skills and personal context of their patients. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available