'The burden is very much on yourself': A qualitative study to understand the illness and treatment burden of hearing loss across the life course.

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is a chronic health condition that rises sharply with age. The way people respond to and cope with health conditions is influenced by their capacity to perform illness and treatment-related work. The aim was to explore the cumulative burdens of living with hearing loss and the resources mobilised to ease the burdens. METHODS: A qualitative design was used with semi-structured interviews (online or in-person) with participants recruited through audiology services and nonclinical services, such as lip-reading classes. Forty-six participants with hearing loss aged between 16 and 96 years were interviewed. An abductive approach, informed by May et al.'s burden of treatment theory, was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: The illness burden involved participants working to make sense of their hearing loss, engaging in emotional work in response to changes in sound, social interactions and identity and coping with the daily frustrations required to communicate with others. Abandonment and uncertainty characterised the treatment burden; participants engaged in emotional work to adjust to hearing technology and deal with the uncertainty of how their hearing might progress. To ameliorate the burdens, participants drew on internal resources (psychological, health literacy, cognitive) and external resources (social support, financial, information, technology). CONCLUSIONS: The workload of hearing loss appears largely devolved to the patient and is not always visible. Our work indicates the need to widen approaches in audiological care through the implementation of lifeworld-led care, family-centred care and peer support to build support for those with hearing loss. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We developed the project in consultation with members of the public who have lived experience of hearing loss recruited through Aston University and volunteer links to audiology services. We also consulted people more likely to be affected by hearing loss adults including adults with learning disabilities, older adults in residential care and people from South Asia (Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani communities). These individuals commented on the study aims, interview schedule and participant recruitment practices. One of our co-authors (expert by experience) contributed to the development and interpretation of themes and preparation of the final manuscript.

Local control and survival after stereotactic radiosurgery for colorectal cancer brain metastases: an international multicenter analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to characterize local tumor control (LC), overall survival (OS), and safety of stereotactic radiosurgery for colorectal brain metastasis (CRBM). METHODS: Ten international institutions participating in the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation provided data for this retrospective case series. This study included 187 patients with CRBM (281 tumors), with a median age of 62 years and 56.7% being male. Most patients (53.5%) had solitary tumors, although 10.7% had > 5 tumors. The median tumor volume was 2.7 cm3 (IQR 0.22-8.1 cm3), and the median margin dose was 20 Gy (IQR 18-22 Gy). RESULTS: The 3-year LC and OS rates were 72% and 20%, respectively. Symptomatic adverse radiation effects occurred in 1.6% of patients. In the multivariate analysis, age > 65 years and tumor volume > 4.0 cm3 were significant predictors of tumor progression (hazard ratio [HR] 2.6, 95% CI 1.4-4.9; p = 0.003 and HR 3.4, 95% CI 1.7-6.9; p < 0.001, respectively). Better performance status (Karnofsky Performance Scale score > 80) was associated with a reduced risk of tumor progression (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.73; p = 0.004). Patient age > 62 years (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.3; p = 0.03) and the presence of active extracranial disease (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.4; p = 0.009) were significantly associated with worse OS. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic radiosurgery offers a high LC rate and a low rate of symptomatic adverse radiation effects for the majority of CRBMs. The OS and LC favored younger patients with high functional performance scores and inactive extracranial disease.

Protocol for the development and validation of a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) for people with hearing loss: the PREM-HeLP.

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is a common chronic health condition and adversely affects communication and social function resulting in loneliness, social isolation and depression. We know little about the patient experience of living with hearing loss and their views on the quality of the audiology service. In this study, we will develop and validate the first patient-reported experience measure (PREM) to understand patients' experiences of living with hearing loss and their healthcare interactions with audiology services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will develop the PREM in three phases: (1) development of PREM prototype (items/statements) derived from previous qualitative work and narrative review, (2) cognitive interview testing of the PREM prototype using a 'think aloud' technique to examine the acceptability and comprehensibility of the tool and refine accordingly and (3) psychometric testing of the modified PREM with 300 participants to assess the reliability and validity of the tool using Rasch analyses with sequential item reduction. Eligible participants will be young people and adults aged 16 years and over who have hearing loss. Participants will be recruited from three clinical sites located in England (Bath, Bristol) and Scotland (Tayside) and non-clinical settings (eg, lip-reading classes, residential care settings, national charity links, social media). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Service (approval date: 6 May 2022; ref: 22/WS/0057) and the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW) Approval (approval date: 14 June 2022; IRAS project ID: 308816). Findings will be shared with our patient and public involvement groups, academics, audiology communities and services and local commissioners via publications and presentations. The PREM will be made available to clinicians and researchers without charge.

Protocol for a qualitative study exploring the lived experience of hearing loss and patient reported experience in the UK: the HeLP study.

INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, hearing loss is a significant public health issue and one of the most common chronic health conditions experienced by older adults. Hearing loss is associated with communication difficulties, social withdrawal, isolation and lower quality of life. Although hearing aid technology has improved significantly, the workload of managing hearing aids has increased. The aim of this qualitative study is to develop a novel theory of people's lived experience of hearing loss across the lifespan. METHODS: Eligible participants will be young people and adults aged 16 years and above who have a hearing loss and carers/family members of people with a hearing loss. This study will use individual, in-depth face-to-face or online interviews. With participants' permission, interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A grounded theory approach to concurrent data gathering and analysis will develop grouped codes and categories and link these to provide a novel theory to describe the experience of hearing loss. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Service (approval date: 6 May 2022 ref: 22/WS/0057) and the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales Approval (approval date: 14 June 2022; IRAS project ID: 308816). The research will inform the development of a Patient Reported Experience Measure to improve the information and support given to patients. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles and at academic conferences, as well as to our patient and public involvement groups, healthcare professionals, audiology services and local commissioners.

Local Control and Survival Outcomes After Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases From Gastrointestinal Primaries: An International Multicenter Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding outcomes for patients with gastrointestinal (GI) primaries and brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). OBJECTIVE: To examine clinical outcomes after SRS for patients with brain metastases from GI primaries and evaluate potential prognostic factors. METHODS: The International Radiosurgery Research Foundation centers were queried for patients with brain metastases from GI primaries managed with SRS. Primary outcomes were local control (LC) and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for univariate analysis (UVA) of prognostic factors. Factors significant on UVA were evaluated with a Cox multivariate analysis proportional hazards model. Logistic regressions were used to examine correlations with RN. RESULTS: We identified 263 eligible patients with 543 brain metastases. Common primary sites were rectal (31.2%), colon (31.2%), and esophagus (25.5%) with a median age of 61.6 years (range: 37-91.4 years) and a median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of 90% (range: 40%-100%). One-year and 2-year LC rates were 83.5% (95% CI: 78.9%-87.1%) and 73.0% (95% CI: 66.4%-78.5%), respectively. On UVA, age >65 years ( P = .001), dose <20 Gy ( P = .006) for single-fraction plans, KPS <90% ( P < .001), and planning target volume ≥2cc ( P = .007) were associated with inferior LC. All factors other than dose were significant on multivariate analysis ( P ≤ .002). One-year and 2-year OS rates were 68.0% (95% CI: 61.5%-73.6%) and 31.2% (95% CI: 24.6%-37.9%), respectively. Age > 65 years ( P = .006), KPS <90% ( P = .005), and extracranial metastases ( P = .05) were associated with inferior OS. CONCLUSION: SRS resulted in comparable LC with common primaries. Age and KPS were associated with both LC and OS with planning target volume and extracranial metastases correlating with LC and OS, respectively. These factors should be considered in GI cancer patient selection for SRS.

Person-based co-design of a decision aid template for people with a genetic predisposition to cancer.

Background: People with genetic predispositions to cancer are faced with complex health decisions about managing their risk. Decision aids can support informed, values-based decisions, alongside shared decision-making with a clinician. Whilst diagnoses of genetic predispositions to cancer are increasing, there is no scalable decision aid to support these people. This paper presents an accessible, relevant decision aid template which can be adapted for different predispositions to cancer. Methods: The decision aid template was co-developed with 12 patients affected by cancer and informed by empirical and theoretical literature. In addition, consultations were conducted with a further 19 people with Lynch syndrome; a specific genetic predisposition to cancer. Clinical stakeholders were consulted regularly. Coulter's framework for decision aid development guided the process, and these activities were complemented by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, and the latest evidence on communicating risk in decision aids. Programme theory was developed to hypothesise how the decision aid would support decision-making and contextual factors which could influence the process. Guiding principles co-developed with the patient panel described how the decision aid could effectively engage people. Results: The in-depth co-design process led to the identification of five core components of an accessible decision aid template for people with a genetic predisposition to cancer: defining the decision; option grid showing implications of each option; optional further details such as icon arrays to show tailored risk and personal narratives; values clarification activity; and a summary to facilitate discussion with a clinician. Specific guidance was produced describing how to develop each component. The guiding principles identified that the decision aid template needed to promote trust, reduce distress, and be comprehensive, personally relevant and accessible in order to engage people. Conclusion: Adopting a co-design process helped ensure that the decision aid components were relevant and accessible to the target population. The template could have widespread application through being adapted for different genetic predispositions. The exact content should be co-designed with people from diverse backgrounds with lived experience of the specific predisposition to ensure it is as useful, engaging and relevant as possible.

Fasciola hepatica Cathepsin L Zymogens: Immuno-Proteomic Evidence for Highly Immunogenic Zymogen-Specific Conformational Epitopes to Support Diagnostics Development.

Fasciola hepatica, the common liver fluke and causative agent of zoonotic fasciolosis, impacts on food security with global economic losses of over $3.2 BN per annum through deterioration of animal health, productivity losses, and livestock death and is also re-emerging as a foodborne human disease. Cathepsin proteases present a major vaccine and diagnostic target of the F. hepatica excretory/secretory (ES) proteome, but utilization in diagnostics of the highly antigenic zymogen stage of these proteins is surprisingly yet to be fully exploited. Following an immuno-proteomic investigation of recombinant and native procathepsins ((r)FhpCL1), including mass spectrometric analyses (DOI: 10.6019/PXD030293), and using counterpart polyclonal antibodies to a recombinant mutant procathepsin L (anti-rFhΔpCL1), we have confirmed recombinant and native cathepsin L zymogens contain conserved, highly antigenic epitopes that are conformationally dependent. Furthermore, using diagnostic platforms, including pilot serum and fecal antigen capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests, the diagnostic capacities of cathepsin L zymogens were assessed and validated, offering promising efficacy as markers of infection and for monitoring treatment efficacy.

'You're kind of left to your own devices': a qualitative focus group study of patients with breast, prostate or blood cancer at a hospital in the South West of England, exploring their engagement with exercise and physical activity during cancer treatment and in the months following standard care.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of patients with breast, prostate or blood cancer, regarding their (1) engagement with exercise and physical activity during treatment and in the months following standard care, and (2) the meanings attached to these lifestyle behaviours. DESIGN: A qualitative study using focus groups. The groups were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using Framework analysis. SETTING: A hospital-based cancer treatment centre in the South-West of England. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen people who had either completed treatment or were currently on maintenance therapy for breast, prostate or blood cancer (non-Hodgkin lymphoma or Hodgkin lymphoma). RESULTS: Participants reported treatment limiting their ability to engage in exercise and physical activity. However, participants were aware of the physiological, emotional and social benefits of exercise and expressed a desire to maintain a physically active lifestyle before, during and after treatment. They noted a lack of concrete guidance and appropriate exercise classes for people with cancer and felt poorly informed about the type, intensity, duration and frequency of exercise they should be undertaking. As such, participants reported making decisions on their own, relying on their intuition and listening to their bodies to gauge whether they were doing enough exercise (or not). CONCLUSIONS: Participants were aware of the benefits of a physically active lifestyle during and following cancer treatment, but were not familiar with exercise and physical activity guidelines for people living with and beyond cancer. There is a need for healthcare professionals, academics and policy makers to determine how exercise and physical activity can be supported in clinical settings in realistic and meaningful ways accommodating individual patient circumstances.

The Risk-Reducing Effect of Aspirin in Lynch Syndrome Carriers: Development and Evaluation of an Educational Leaflet.

Carriers of germline mutations in genes associated with Lynch syndrome are at increased risk for colorectal, endometrial, ovarian, and other cancers. There is evidence that daily consumption of aspirin may reduce cancer risk in these individuals. There is a need for educational resources to inform carriers of the risk-reducing effects of aspirin or to support decision-making. An educational leaflet describing the risks and benefits of using aspirin as risk-reducing medicine in carriers of Lynch-syndrome-related mutations is developed and pilot tested in 2017. Carriers are ascertained through a familial cancer clinic and surveyed using a mailed, self-administered questionnaire. The leaflet is highly rated for its content, clarity, length, relevance, and visual appeal by more than 70% of the participants. Most participants (91%) report "a lot" or "quite a bit" of improvement in perceived understanding in knowledge about who might benefit from taking aspirin, its benefits, how long to take it, the reduction in bowel cancer risk, and the optimal dosage. A few (14%) participants seek more information on the dosage of aspirin. This leaflet will be useful as an aid to facilitate discussion between patients and their health care professionals about the use of aspirin as a risk-reducing medication.

Recovering and rebuilding after COVID-19: What are the best ways to support medical radiation science students?

The Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown periods have impacted Medical Radiation Science (MRS) students professionally and personally. This Editorial provides commentary on two papers that generate discussion on how MRS students can be supported during these challenging times. We highlight how Universities and clinical departments can support students through tailored and proactive support, building resilience and peer group supervision.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient Decision Aids for Socially Disadvantaged Populations: Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IDPAS).

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and other shared decision-making (SDM) interventions for socially disadvantaged populations has not been well studied. PURPOSE: To assess whether PtDAs and other SDM interventions improve outcomes or decrease health inequalities among socially disadvantaged populations and determine the critical features of successful interventions. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to October 2019. Cochrane systematic reviews on PtDAs. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials of PtDAs and SDM interventions that included socially disadvantaged populations. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent double data extraction using a standardized form and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-five PtDA and 13 other SDM intervention trials met our inclusion criteria. Compared with usual care, PtDAs improved knowledge (mean difference = 13.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.01, 18.82 [I2 = 96%]) and patient-clinician communication (relative risk = 1.62, 95% CI 1.42, 1.84 [I2 = 0%]). PtDAs reduced decisional conflict (mean difference = -9.59; 95% CI -18.94, -0.24 [I2 = 84%]) and the proportion undecided (relative risk = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28, 0.53 [I2 = 75%]). PtDAs did not affect anxiety (standardized mean difference = 0.02, 95% CI -0.22, 0.26 [I2 = 70%]). Only 1 trial looked at clinical outcomes (hemoglobin A1C). Five of the 12 PtDA studies that compared outcomes by disadvantaged standing found that outcomes improved more for socially disadvantaged participants. No evidence indicated which intervention characteristics were most effective. Results were similar for SDM intervention trials. LIMITATIONS: Sixteen PtDA studies had an overall unclear risk of bias. Heterogeneity was high for most outcomes. Most studies only had short-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: PtDAs led to better outcomes among socially disadvantaged populations but did not reduce health inequalities. We could not determine which intervention features were most effective.[Box: see text].

Addressing Health Literacy in Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing recognition of the importance of addressing health literacy in patient decision aid (PtDA) development. PURPOSE: An updated review as part of IPDAS 2.0 examined the extent to which PtDAs are designed to meet the needs of people with low health literacy/socially-disadvantaged populations. DATA SOURCES: Reference lists of Cochrane reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PtDAs (2014, 2017, and upcoming 2021 versions). STUDY SELECTION: RCTs that assessed the impact of PtDAs on low health literacy or other socially-disadvantaged groups (i.e., ≥50% participants from socially-disadvantaged groups and/or subgroup analysis in socially-disadvantaged group/s). DATA EXTRACTION: Two researchers independently extracted data into a standardized form including PtDA development and evaluation details. We searched online repositories and emailed authors to access PtDAs to verify grade reading level, understandability, and actionability. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-five of 213 RCTs met the inclusion criteria, illustrating that only 12% of studies addressed the needs of low health literacy or other socially-disadvantaged groups. Grade reading level was calculated in 8 of 25 studies (33%), which is recommended in previous IPDAS guidelines. We accessed and independently assessed 11 PtDAs. None were written at sixth-grade level or below. Ten PtDAs met the recommended threshold for understandability, but only 5 met the recommended threshold for actionability. We also conducted a post hoc subgroup meta-analysis and found that knowledge improvements after receiving a PtDA were greater in studies that reported using strategies to reduce cognitive demand in PtDA development compared with studies that did not (χ2 = 14.11, P = 0.0002, I2 = 92.9%). LIMITATIONS: We were unable to access 13 of 24 PtDAs. Conclusions. Greater attention to health literacy and socially-disadvantaged populations is needed in the field of PtDAs to ensure equity in decision support.

Do Personal Stories Make Patient Decision Aids More Effective? An Update from the International Patient Decision Aids Standards.

BACKGROUND: This article evaluates the evidence for the inclusion of patient narratives in patient decision aids (PtDAs). We define patient narratives as stories, testimonials, or anecdotes that provide illustrative examples of the experiences of others that are relevant to the decision at hand. METHOD: To evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness of narratives in PtDAs, we conducted a narrative scoping review of the literature from January 2013 through June 2019 to identify relevant literature published since the last International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) update in 2013. We considered research articles that examined the impact of narratives on relevant outcomes or described relevant theoretical mechanisms. RESULTS: The majority of the empirical work on narratives did not measure concepts that are typically found in the PtDA literature (e.g., decisional conflict). Yet, a few themes emerged from our review that can be applied to the PtDA context, including the impact of narratives on relevant outcomes (knowledge, behavior change, and psychological constructs), as well as several theoretical mechanisms about how and why narratives work that can be applied to the PtDA context. CONCLUSION: Based on this evidence update, we suggest that there may be situations when narratives could enhance the effectiveness of PtDAs. The recent theoretical work on narratives has underscored the fact that narratives are a multifaceted construct and should no longer be considered a binary option (include narratives or not). However, the bottom line is that the evidence does not support a recommendation for narratives to be a necessary component of PtDAs.

Influence of lived experience on risk perception among women who received a breast cancer polygenic risk score: 'Another piece of the pie'.

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) are personalized assessments of disease risk based on the cumulative effect of common low-risk genetic variants. PRS have been shown to accurately predict women's breast cancer risk and are likely to be incorporated into personalized breast cancer risk management programs. However, there are few studies investigating the individual impact of receiving a breast cancer PRS. Existing studies have not demonstrated significant changes in perceived risk or risk management behaviors after receipt of polygenic risk information. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore how women with a family history of breast cancer construct breast cancer risk perceptions after receipt of a breast cancer PRS. Unaffected women with a family history of breast cancer who had not previously received genetic counseling regarding their breast cancer risk were invited to participate in this study. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 women who attended a familial cancer clinic in the Australian states of Victoria and Tasmania. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. Women's lived experience played a significant role in the construction and maintenance of their breast cancer risk perception. Women's pre-existing risk perceptions were informed by their family history and their knowledge that breast cancer is a multifactorial disease. Knowing that breast cancer is a multifactorial disease enabled most women to integrate genetic information with their pre-existing notions of risk. Women reported that the information they received was consistent with their existing notions of personal risk and screening advice. Therefore, the PRS did not lead to a change in perceived risk or risk management behaviors for most women. The results of this study provide insight into how polygenic risk information is integrated with pre-existing notions of risk, which will inform its implementation into clinical practice.

Supporting and preparing patients for radiotherapy: Patients' and radiation therapists' perspectives on their one-to-one consultations.

OBJECTIVE: Patients are often anxious and lack knowledge of radiotherapy prior to commencing treatment. Evidence-based interventions are required to reduce patient anxiety and increase patient preparation before treatment. This study is part of a larger project examining the effectiveness of an innovative preparatory intervention "RT Prepare," to reduce patient psychological distress prior to treatment for breast cancer. This study aimed to explore patients' and RTs' perceptions about the "RT Prepare" intervention and was conducted to assist with refinement of the intervention for future implementation. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and radiation therapists (RTs) to elicit their perspectives on the "RT Prepare" intervention. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Telephone interviews were conducted with 21 patients who had received the intervention and 15 RTs who had delivered the intervention. Patients and RTs described the intervention positively and highlighted that it was beneficial for preparing patients for treatment planning and treatment. The overarching themes were communication skills; preparation; information provision and dedicated space and time. CONCLUSION: RT Prepare was well received by patients and RTs. Practice implications Based on the results of this study and our quantitative findings, implementation of the intervention would be beneficial for both patients and RTs.

Learners' experience and perceived impact of a health literacy program in adult basic education: a qualitative study.

Objectives and importance of the study: Adult literacy programs aim to empower learners to participate more effectively in everyday life. This includes programs with health content embedded in curricula to target health literacy. Adult learners who attend these programs represent a heterogeneous population, but include a high proportion of hard-to-reach or socially disadvantaged groups in terms of age, ethnicity, educational background, language and prevalence of learning disabilities. In 2014, we conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial of a health literacy program in adult basic education classes across New South Wales, Australia. This paper reports findings from a qualitative study exploring learners' experience of the course and its perceived impact on their lives, as well as their understanding and confidence about health. STUDY TYPE: Qualitative interview study. METHOD: We conducted semistructured interviews as part of the evaluation of the 18-week health literacy program, with participants purposively recruited from six health literacy classes (n = 22). Researchers trained in qualitative methods interviewed adult learners either face to face or over the phone using a topic guide. Data was analysed using the Framework method, a matrix-based approach to thematic analysis. RESULTS: The majority of interviewees were female, lived in metropolitan areas and were from non-English-speaking backgrounds. Most had existing self-reported health problems and inadequate functional health literacy. Most participants described positive impacts of the health literacy course on their language, literacy and numeracy skills, functional health literacy skills, and health knowledge. They also reported being able to translate this into health actions including interacting with providers, accessing and using healthcare, and managing health and illness (e.g. making healthier food choices). Learners also described positive social outcomes of the course, including feelings of connectedness and interpersonal trust within a new network of learners, and reported sharing new knowledge with others in their communities. CONCLUSIONS: The findings add value to existing limited evidence that has demonstrated the untapped potential of adult basic education to develop health literacy skills among socially disadvantaged groups. Learners valued the opportunity to share experiences in structured group learning, and reported confidence to transfer new knowledge into their home and wider social network.

Evaluation of an Australian Health Literacy Program Delivered in Adult Education Settings.

BACKGROUND: Adult education targeting health literacy (HL) may bring added value in the form of improved health. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effects of a HL program as part of an adult education curriculum for adults with low literacy and numeracy. METHODS: This was a partial-cluster randomized controlled trial among 308 adults enrolled in basic education programs in Australia. Of the 308 participants, 141 (46%) were randomized to either the standard program (language, literacy, and numeracy [LLN]), or the HL intervention (LLN with embedded health content); the remainder (n = 167) were allocated to standard intervention programs by the education provider at the class level. The main outcomes were functional HL, self-reported confidence, patient activation, generic HL (ie, HLQ, health knowledge, and self-reported health behavior). Data were collected at baseline, immediately after, and at 6 months post-intervention. KEY RESULTS: Of the 308 participants, 71% had limited literacy and 60% spoke a language other than English at home. Both interventions benefited participants, with improvements from baseline to immediate follow up on individual-level functional HL (e.g., reading a thermometer; HL group 18.4% vs. standard group 7.2%; p = .001), confidence (HL group 0.34 vs. standard group 0.06; p = .014) and health literacy questionnaire (HLQ) subscales. At 6 months, improvements in confidence (p < .001) and some HLQ measures were retained. A consistent pattern of increased improvement in the HL program was observed compared to the standard program, although only some measures reached statistical significance: reading a food label (HL group 6.03/10 correct vs. standard group 5.49/10 correct; p = .022); confidence (p = .008); ability to actively manage health (HLQ) (p = .017), and health knowledge at 6 months (HL group 68% vs. standard group 60% correct, p = .052). HL participants reported being more likely to share course information and rated the program more useful to understand their health. CONCLUSIONS: Improving language, literacy, and numeracy generally has potential public health benefits that are retained at 6 months. Integrating health content adds further value to adult basic learning, is feasible, and potentially scalable. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2019;3(Suppl.):S42-S57.]. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: We compared the effect of an adult education-based health literacy (HL) program versus a standard language, literacy, and numeracy program on students' HL skills and psychosocial outcomes. Although students in both trial arms improved their skills, students in the HL program had better outcomes with higher HL, greater confidence, and higher health knowledge scores at 6 months.

Skills for Shared Decision-Making: Evaluation of a Health Literacy Program for Consumers with Lower Literacy Levels.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) has been found to be significantly and positively associated with improved patient outcomes. For an SDM process to occur, patients require functional, communicative, and critical health literacy (HL) skills. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a program to improve health literacy skills for SDM in adults with lower literacy. METHODS: An HL program including an SDM component (HL + SDM) and teaching of the three "AskShareKnow" questions was delivered in adult basic education settings in New South Wales, Australia. The program was evaluated using a partially cluster-randomized controlled trial comparing it to standard language, literacy, and numeracy (LLN) training. We measured the effect of these programs on (1) HL skills for SDM (conceptual knowledge, graphical literacy, health numeracy), (2) types of questions considered important for health decision-making, (3) preferences for control in decision-making, and (4) decisional conflict. We also measured AskShareKnow question recall, use, and evaluation in HL + SDM participants. KEY RESULTS: There were 308 participants from 28 classes enrolled in the study. Most participants had limited functional HL (71%) and spoke a language other than English at home (60%). In the primary analysis, the HL + SDM program compared with the standard LLN program significantly increased conceptual knowledge (19.1% difference between groups in students achieving the competence threshold; p = .018) and health numeracy (10.9% difference; p = .032), but not graphical literacy (5.8% difference; p = .896). HL + SDM participants were significantly more likely to consider it important to ask questions that would enable SDM compared to standard LLN participants who prioritized nonmedical procedural questions (all p < .01). There was no difference in preferences for control in decision-making or in decisional conflict. Among HL + SDM participants, 79% (n = 85) correctly recalled at least one of the AskShareKnow questions immediately post-intervention, and 35% (n = 29) after 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Teaching SDM content increased participants' HL skills for SDM and changed the nature of the questions they would ask health care professionals in a way that would enable shared health decisions. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2019;3(Suppl.):S58-S74.]. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: We developed a health literacy program that included a shared decision-making (SDM) section. The program was delivered in adult basic education classes by trained educators and compared to standard language, literacy, and numeracy training. Teaching SDM content increased participants' health literacy skills for SDM and changed the nature of the questions they would ask health care professionals.

Development and pilot-testing of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for individuals with varying health literacy levels.

OBJECTIVE: Making an informed decision about colorectal cancer screening requires health literacy. Our aim was to develop and pilot-test a computer-based decision aid to support informed decision making about whether or not to participate in colorectal cancer screening for individuals with varying health literacy levels in the Netherlands. METHODS: First, we designed and adapted the decision aid prototype among 25 individuals with low (n = 15) and adequate (n = 10) health literacy. Second, we used a before/after study to assess changes in knowledge, attitude, intention, decisional conflict, deliberation, anxiety and risk perception in an online survey among 81 individuals eligible for colorectal cancer screening with low (n = 35) and adequate (n = 46) health literacy. RESULTS: The decision aid was acceptable, comprehensible, reduced decisional conflict, increased deliberation and improved knowledge about colorectal cancer screening, but not about colorectal cancer, among individuals with adequate and low health literacy. Usability was slightly higher for participants with adequate health literacy compared to those with low health literacy. CONCLUSION: The decision aid is promising in supporting informed decision making about colorectal cancer screening, also among individuals with lower health literacy. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Further refinement of interactive features, such as videos, animations and the values clarification exercise, is needed to increase the usability of the decision aid.