No abstract

The authors examined whether tailored self-management support (SMS) strategies reach patients in a safety net system and explored variation by language, literacy, and insurance. English-, Spanish-, and Cantonese-speaking diabetes patients were randomized to weekly automated telephone disease management (ATDM) or monthly group medical visits. The SMS programs employ distinct communication methods but share common objectives, including behavioral "action plans." Reach was measured using three complementary dimensions: (a) participation among clinics, clinicians, and patients; (b) patient representativeness; and (c) patient engagement with SMS. Participation rates were high across all levels and preferentially attracted Spanish-language speakers, uninsured, and Medicaid recipients. Although both programs engaged a significant proportion in action planning, ATDM yielded higher engagement, especially among those with limited English proficiency and limited literacy. These results provide important insights for health communication and translational research with respect to realizing the public health benefits of SMS and can inform system-level planning to reduce health disparities.

Physicians are responsive to receiving notification of their patients' limited HL, and patients support the potential utility of HL screening. However, instituting screening programs without specific training and/or system-wide support for physicians and patients is unlikely to be a powerful tool in improving diabetes outcomes.

Despite the importance of clinician-patient communication, little is known about rates and predictors of medication miscommunication. Measuring rates of miscommunication, as well as differences between verbal and visual modes of assessment, can inform efforts to more effectively communicate about medications. We studied 220 diverse patients in an anticoagulation clinic to assess concordance between patient and clinician reports of warfarin regimens. Bilingual research assistants asked patients to (1) verbalize their prescribed weekly warfarin regimen and (2) identify this regimen from a digitized color menu of warfarin pills. We obtained clinician reports of patient regimens from chart review. Patients were categorized as having regimen concordance if there were no patient-clinician discrepancies in total weekly dosage. We then examined whether verbal and visual concordance rates varied with patient's language and health literacy. Fifty percent of patients achieved verbal concordance and 66% achieved visual concordance with clinicians regarding the weekly warfarin regimen (P < .001). Being a Cantonese speaker and having inadequate health literacy were associated with a lower odds of verbal concordance compared with English speakers and subjects with adequate health literacy (AOR 0.44, 0.21-0.93, AOR 0.50, 0.26-0.99, respectively). Neither language nor health literacy was associated with visual discordance. Shifting from verbal to visual modes was associated with greater patient-provider concordance across all patient subgroups, but especially for those with communication barriers.Clinician-patient discordance regarding patients' warfarin regimen was common but occurred less frequently when patients used a visual aid. Visual aids may improve the accuracy of medication assessment, especially for patients with communication barriers.