Health literacy, digital literacy and eHealth literacy in Danish nursing students at entry and graduate level: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The increasing number of people living with one or more chronic conditions imposes a growing demand on healthcare providers. One way to handle this challenge is by re-orientating the way care is provided, empower people and increase their ability to manage their condition. This requires, amongst other factors, sufficient level of health literacy (HL) and digital competences among both patients and the healthcare providers, who serve them. The focus of this study is the level of HL, digital literacy (DL), and eHealth literacy (eHL) in nursing students in Denmark.The objective was to examine the level of these three literacies in entry- and graduate-level nursing students and examine sociodemographic characteristics and self-rated health (SRH) associations. METHODS: A cross sectional study was conducted among 227 students at entry-level and 139 students at graduate-level from a nursing program. The survey consisted of the health literacy questionnaire (HLQ (nine scales)), the eHealth Literacy Assessment toolkit (eHLA (seven scales)), the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ (seven scales)), questions soliciting sociodemographic data, and a single item assessing the students' SRH. Pearson's chi-square test and the Mann-Whitney test were used to examine the differences in HL, DL, and eHL and between groups, and Kendall's tau-b test to examine correlations between SRH and HL, DL, and eHL. RESULTS: The level of HL, DL and eHL tended to be higher among graduate-level students than in entry-level students and was satisfactory. Age, sex, country of origin, and parents' educational level and occupational background influenced students' HL levels. SRH was higher in students at the graduate level. Amongst entry-level students, SRH was positively associated to seven HLQ, four EHLA and four eHLQ, amongst graduate-level students, SRH was positively associated to seven HLQ and six eHLQ. CONCLUSIONS: Educators must be aware of how sociodemographic factors affects students' literacies and increase learning opportunities by mixing students when planning activities. Considering the higher SRH in graduate-level students, HL, DL, and eHL levels indicate that current curricula and study activities are appropriate, but there is still room for improvement.

Differences in the Level of Electronic Health Literacy Between Users and Nonusers of Digital Health Services: An Exploratory Survey of a Group of Medical Outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Digitalization of health services ensures greater availability of services and improved contact to health professionals. To ensure high user adoption rates, we need to understand the indicators of use and nonuse. Traditionally, these have included classic sociodemographic variables such as age, sex, and educational level. Electronic health literacy (eHL) describes knowledge, skills, and experiences in the interaction with digital health services and technology. With our recent introduction of 2 new multidimensional instruments to measure eHL, the eHL questionnaire (eHLQ) and the eHL assessment (eHLA) toolkit, eHL provides a multifaceted approach to understand use and nonuse of digital health solutions in detail. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate how users and nonusers of digital services differ with respect to eHL, in a group of patients with regular contact to a hospital outpatient clinic. Furthermore, to examine how usage and nonusage, and eHL levels are associated with factors such as age, sex, educational level, and self-rated health. METHODS: Outpatients were asked to fill out a survey comprising items about usage of digital services, including digital contact to general practitioner (GP) and communication via the national health portal sundhed.dk, the eHLQ, and the eHLA toolkit, as well as items on age, sex, education, and self-rated health. In total, 246 patients completed the survey. A Mann-Whitney test was used to test for differences between users and nonusers of digital services. Correlation tests described correlations between eHL scales (eHEALSs) and age, education, and self-rated health. A significance level of .0071 was used to reject the null hypothesis in relation to the eHEALSs and usage of digital services. RESULTS: In total, 95.1% (234/246) of the participants used their personal digital ID (NemID), 57.7% (142/246) were in contact with their GPs electronically, and 54.0% (133/246) had used the national health portal (sundhed.dk) within the last 3 months. There were no differences between users and nonusers of sundhed.dk with respect to age, sex, educational level, and self-rated health. Users of NemID scored higher than nonusers in 6 of the 7 dimensions of eHLQ, the only one which did not differ was dimension 2: Understanding of health concepts and language. Sundhed.dk users had a higher score in all of the 7 dimensions except for dimension 4: Feel safe and in control. The eHLA toolkit showed that users of sundhed.dk and NemID had higher levels of eHL with regard to tools 2, 5, 6, and 7. Furthermore, users of sundhed.dk had higher levels of eHL with regard to tools 3 and 4. CONCLUSIONS: Information about patients' eHL may provide clinicians an understanding of patients' reasons for not using digital health services, better than sociodemographic data or self-rated health.

Supportive care needs for women with gynecological cancer and their relatives during the prediagnostic period.

BACKGROUND: The prediagnostic process for gynecological cancer has become quite rapid. It gives the woman limited time to handle new information about her illness and make decisions. The existing support initiatives in Denmark focus on aftercare rather than on needs for support in the prediagnostic period. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the need for supportive care among women with gynecological cancer and their relatives during the prediagnostic period. METHOD: A qualitative descriptive method was applied to semistructured interviews. We interviewed, at different times in the prediagnostic period, 16 women with gynecological cancer and 16 relatives. Participants were recruited at 1 hospital during a 3-month period. RESULTS: Women in the prediagnostic period require an overview of the treatment process supplemented with information, involvement, and help to prepare themselves for treatment. Relatives need involvement, someone to talk to, an overview of the prediagnostic period, and advice on communication about cancer with children and teenagers in the family. CONCLUSIONS: Women with gynecological cancer should be encouraged to let their relatives get involved in the prediagnostic period. Information about the prediagnostic period should be readily accessible at a time when the women and their relatives need this. Internet-based information could be a relevant solution in the prediagnostic period. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Issues concerning support of the relatives and needs among families with children should be spotted in the early diagnostic phase of patients with gynecological cancer. More knowledge about the prediagnostic period should be made available as eHealth solutions.