Health care professionals should tailor their information and support to the health literacy skills and personal context of their patients.

BackgroundThe American short form Patient Activation Measure (PAM) is a 13-item instrument which assesses patient (or consumer) self-reported knowledge, skills and confidence for self-management of one’s health or chronic condition. In this study the PAM was translated into a Dutch version; psychometric properties of the Dutch version were established and the instrument was validated in a panel of chronically ill patients.MethodsThe translation was done according to WHO guidelines. The PAM 13-Dutch was sent to 4178 members of the Dutch National Panel of people with Chronic illness or Disability (NPCD) in April 2010 (study A) and again to a sub sample of this group (N = 973) in June 2010 (study B). Internal consistency, test-retest reliability and cross-validation with the SBSQ-D (a measure for Health literacy) were computed. The Dutch results were compared to similar Danish and American data.ResultsThe psychometric properties of the PAM 13-Dutch were generally good. The level of internal consistency is good (α = 0.88) and item-rest correlations are moderate to strong. The Dutch mean PAM score (61.3) is comparable to the American (61.9) and lower than the Danish (64.2). The test-retest reliability was moderate. The association with Health literacy was weak to moderate.ConclusionsThe PAM-13 Dutch is a reliable instrument to measure patient activation. More research is needed into the validity of the Patient Activation Measure, especially with respect to a more comprehensive measure of Health literacy.

BackgroundIn the last decade, the attention for health literacy has increased in the European Union. This is due to three main reasons. First, reviews have shown that inadequate health literacy is associated with worse health outcomes, higher health care use and expenditure. Second, in all European countries the population is aging and the number of chronically ill people is rising. Improving health literacy in this group can offer greater opportunities to take an active part in society, be independent and improve quality of life. Third, since most research on health literacy has been conducted outside Europe and relatively little is known about the development of health literacy interventions and its effects on outcome measures in European countries. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the evidence on the effectiveness of health literacy interventions in the European Union published between 1995 and 2018.MethodsSearches have been performed in Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane library, PsychINFO, ERIC, Web of Science and SCOPUS for publications on health literacy intervention studies in European Union countries. Studies were included if the research was conducted in one or more Member States of the European Union, the publication described an intervention study, the intervention was aimed at health literacy, the publication described an outcome measure related to health literacy and the publication was written in English, French or German.ResultsA total of 23 studies were included. Three types of interventions were identified; aimed at improving health literacy, tailored to different health literacy levels and aimed at improving health outcomes in general that differentiated in effects for people with different health literacy levels. Most interventions identified in the review focus on the functional level of health literacy or numeracy. The strength of evidence from the European health literacy intervention studies was low and there was a huge heterogeneity in study design, measurement tools and outcomes measured.ConclusionsPromising interventions were tailored to the needs of patients, addressing functional, interactive and critical skills and use not difficult animated spoken text. Future research should focus on the development and assessment of such interventions and use stronger designs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-6331-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

The present study explored illness perceptions of end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on both haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) treatment, and their associations with quality of life. Leventhal's self-regulation model (SRM) was used as a theoretical framework. Illness perceptions and quality of life were assessed with the IPQ-R and the SF-36 in 91 HD and 42 PD patients participating in the NECOSAD-study. Compared to HD patients, PD patients experienced more personal control and had a better understanding of the illness. Illness perceptions explained from 17 to 51% of the variance in quality of life scores. Perception of more symptoms, more consequences and lower personal control were associated with lower well-being. The concept of illness perceptions is useful in understanding the impact of ESRD and of dialysis treatment on quality of life. Interventions aimed at providing more knowledge about ESRD and dialysis, and provision of skills to coping with the illness and its consequences may improve quality of life in dialysis patients.