Health literacy in former Soviet Union immigrants in the US: A mixed methods study

Measuring General Health Literacy in Chinese adults: validation of the HLS19-Q12 instrument

BACKGROUND

Health literacy measurement lays a solid foundation to identify associations with health outcomes and monitor population health literacy levels over time. In mainland China, most existing health literacy instruments are either knowledge-based or practice-based, making health literacy results incomparable between China and other countries. This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the 12-item Health Literacy Population Survey (HLS19-Q12) in a general population of Chinese adults.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted to recruit primary carers of students from 11 schools in Zhengzhou, Henan Province, using convenience cluster sampling. Participants completed an online self-administered survey that collected information on key sociodemographics, health literacy (HLS19-Q12 and a comparison tool: Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)), and health-related outcomes. Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist as a guideline, we tested internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity, structural validity, concurrent predictive validity, and convergent validity of the HLS19-Q12.

RESULTS

Overall, 14,184 participants completed the full survey. The HLS19-Q12 showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.93), moderate test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.54), satisfactory content validity (based on the 12-matrix health literacy model), and strong structural validity (comparative fit index = 0.94, Tucker and Lewis's index of fit = 0.93, root mean square error of approximation = 0.095). Concurrent predictive validity results showed health literacy was associated with both health determinants and health-related outcomes. The HLS19-Q12 had weak to strong correlations (coefficients = 0.24 to 0.42) with the nine scales of the HLQ. Respondents had an average score of 81.6 (± 23.0) when using the HLS19-Q12, with 35.0% and 7.5% having problematic and inadequate levels of health literacy, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The HLS19-Q12 is a reliable and valid instrument to measure health literacy in our sample. Further validation is needed with a more nationally representative sample of Chinese adults. The HLS19-Q12 could be used as a comprehensive, skills-based, and easy-to-administer health literacy assessment tool integrated into population surveys and intervention evaluations.

Factors that influence health literacy in patients with coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

to investigate the factors that exert an influence on health literacy in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

a crosssectional study, including 122 patients with coronary diseases (60.7% male; 62.07 ± 8.8 years old). Health literacy and specific knowledge about the disease were evaluated through interviews with the participants by means of the Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults and the Short version of the coronary artery disease education questionnaire. The data were described by means of central tendency measures and frequencies. The factors that exert an influence on health literacy were determined by means of a linear regression model. The significance level adopted was 5%. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee.

RESULTS

age and arterial hypertension presented an inverse and significant relationship with health literacy. On the other hand, higher schooling levels and having a job were associated with better scores in the health literacy instrument. Specific knowledge about the disease did not exert any influence on health literacy. The variables included in the regression model explained 55.3% of inadequate literacy.

CONCLUSION

this study, knowledge about the disease exerts no influence on health literacy: however, the professionals should consider the sociodemographic and clinical factors to plan the interventions.

Differences in health literacy domains among migrants and their descendants in Germany

Background

Health literacy (HL) is considered to be an important precondition for health. HL research often identifies migrants as vulnerable for low HL. However, in-depth data on HL among migrants especially in its domains of health care, disease prevention and health promotion and its determinants are still scarce.

Objective

The aim of this study was therefore to analyse the current status of HL among migrants and their descendants from Turkey and from the former Soviet Union (FSU) in Germany and factors associated with it. This has not been studied using large-scale data and bilingual interviews. We differentiate between dimensions of HL, namely the domains of health care, disease prevention and health promotion which goes beyond many previous studies. In addition, we explore new mechanisms by testing the explanatory power of self-efficacy and interethnic contacts for migrants' HL.

Methods

The study includes 825 first- and second-generation adult migrants from two of the largest immigration groups in Germany, from Turkey and FSU, who were interviewed face-to-face in German, Turkish or Russian in late summer 2020. HL was measured using the HLS19-Q47 instrument. Age, gender, educational level, social status and financial deprivation, chronic illness, health-related literacy skills, self-efficacy, interethnic contacts, migration generation, duration of stay and region of origin were considered as possible determinants. Ordinary least square regressions were estimated.

Results

The average general HL score was 65.5. HL in health promotion and disease prevention was lower than in health care. Low financial deprivation, health-related literacy skills, and self-efficacy were positively correlated with each HL domain. Educational level, social status, age, gender, duration of stay and interethnic contacts were positively correlated with HL in some domains. Region of origin was only correlated with the domain of disease prevention until interethnic contact was accounted for.

Conclusion

Our study contributes to the existing knowledge by analyzing different domains of HL and testing its correlations with self-efficacy and interethnic contact among migrants. We reveal that migrants cannot generally be considered as vulnerable for low HL, as oftentimes outlined. There is a need for interventions e.g. to enhance the understanding of health information among subgroups with lower HL.