Targeted Virtual Health Literacy Education for Community Health Workers: An Evidenced-Based Quality Improvement Project.

IF 0.2 Q4 NURSING
Angela Simmons, Ruth Foreman, Kathleen Tennant
{"title":"Targeted Virtual Health Literacy Education for Community Health Workers: An Evidenced-Based Quality Improvement Project.","authors":"Angela Simmons, Ruth Foreman, Kathleen Tennant","doi":"10.1891/JDNP-2024-0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Low or limited health literacy is a significant problem in the United States as one in three adults in the United States has inadequate health literacy. Low or limited health literacy contributes to poorer health outcomes for patients and increases costs to the consumer and health care system. Strategies that health care professionals can utilize to overcome these barriers include Health Literacy Universal Precautions, Teach Back, and using simple language. <b>Objective:</b> Standardized health literacy training was inconsistent for community health workers (CHWs) resulting in CHWs having difficulty communicating health-related information to the vulnerable populations they serve who often have low to limited health literacy. A contributing factor is the lack of standardized health literacy training, for nonlicensed health care workers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the CHWs' knowledge about health literacy and self-efficacy after targeted health literacy training. <b>Methods:</b> A pre-test, teaching intervention, and posttest were administered by the principal investigator using the Health Literacy Knowledge and Experience Survey (HLKES-2) to measure the CHW's knowledge and self-efficacy by comparing pre- and postdata results. Five virtual 2.5-hour targeted health literacy training courses were conducted by the primary investigator over a 4-month period. The participants (<i>n</i> = 50) were a sample of CHWs across several regions of the state of Pennsylvania. <b>Results:</b> There was a statistically significant difference between both the pre- and posttest scores of the HLKES-2 after the training (<i>p</i> < 0.0001) in the CHW's health literacy knowledge and a statistically significant change (<i>p</i> < 0.03) in their self-efficacy. Demographics revealed statistically significant changes (<i>p</i> < 0.003) that the higher the education (i.e., secondary education or higher) the better the scores on the HLKES-2 survey. <b>Conclusions:</b> Confident, knowledgeable health care workers can enhance health outcomes for patients with low health literacy in many settings. The combined use of education and technology within standardized, targeted health literacy training can promote support of CHWs. <b>Implications for Nursing:</b> Nursing holds a key role in supporting the education of CHWs. This quality improvement study showed a positive correlation between the targeted health literacy training participation and higher knowledge levels and self-efficacy of the CHWs.</p>","PeriodicalId":40310,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Doctoral Nursing Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Doctoral Nursing Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1891/JDNP-2024-0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Low or limited health literacy is a significant problem in the United States as one in three adults in the United States has inadequate health literacy. Low or limited health literacy contributes to poorer health outcomes for patients and increases costs to the consumer and health care system. Strategies that health care professionals can utilize to overcome these barriers include Health Literacy Universal Precautions, Teach Back, and using simple language. Objective: Standardized health literacy training was inconsistent for community health workers (CHWs) resulting in CHWs having difficulty communicating health-related information to the vulnerable populations they serve who often have low to limited health literacy. A contributing factor is the lack of standardized health literacy training, for nonlicensed health care workers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the CHWs' knowledge about health literacy and self-efficacy after targeted health literacy training. Methods: A pre-test, teaching intervention, and posttest were administered by the principal investigator using the Health Literacy Knowledge and Experience Survey (HLKES-2) to measure the CHW's knowledge and self-efficacy by comparing pre- and postdata results. Five virtual 2.5-hour targeted health literacy training courses were conducted by the primary investigator over a 4-month period. The participants (n = 50) were a sample of CHWs across several regions of the state of Pennsylvania. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between both the pre- and posttest scores of the HLKES-2 after the training (p < 0.0001) in the CHW's health literacy knowledge and a statistically significant change (p < 0.03) in their self-efficacy. Demographics revealed statistically significant changes (p < 0.003) that the higher the education (i.e., secondary education or higher) the better the scores on the HLKES-2 survey. Conclusions: Confident, knowledgeable health care workers can enhance health outcomes for patients with low health literacy in many settings. The combined use of education and technology within standardized, targeted health literacy training can promote support of CHWs. Implications for Nursing: Nursing holds a key role in supporting the education of CHWs. This quality improvement study showed a positive correlation between the targeted health literacy training participation and higher knowledge levels and self-efficacy of the CHWs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信