Publications

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether the effect of health literacy (HL) on patient-physician communication varies with patient-physician language concordance and communication type.

METHODS

771 outpatients rated three types of patient-physician communication: receptive communication (physician to patient); proactive communication (patient to physician); and interactive, bidirectional communication. We assessed HL and language categories including: English-speakers, Spanish-speakers with Spanish-speaking physicians (Spanish-concordant), and Spanish-speakers without Spanish-speaking physicians (Spanish-discordant).

RESULTS

Overall, the mean age of participants was 56 years, 58% were women, 53% were English-speakers, 23% Spanish-concordant, 24% Spanish-discordant, and 51% had limited HL. Thirty percent reported poor receptive, 28% poor proactive, and 56% poor interactive communication. In multivariable analyses, limited HL was associated with poor receptive and proactive communication. Spanish-concordance and discordance was associated with poor interactive communication. In stratified analyses, among English-speakers, limited HL was associated with poor receptive and proactive, but not interactive communication. Among Spanish-concordant participants, limited HL was associated with poor proactive and interactive, but not receptive communication. Spanish-discordant participants reported the worst communication for all types, independent of HL.

CONCLUSION

Limited health literacy impedes patient-physician communication, but its effects vary with language concordance and communication type. For language discordant dyads, language barriers may supersede limited HL in impeding interactive communication.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Patient-physician communication interventions for diverse populations need to consider HL, language concordance, and communication type.

BACKGROUND

Advance directive law may compromise the clinical effectiveness of advance directives.

PURPOSE

To identify unintended legal consequences of advance directive law that may prevent patients from communicating end-of-life preferences.

DATA SOURCES

Advance directive legal statutes for all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia and English-language searches of LexisNexis, Westlaw, and MEDLINE from 1966 to August 2010.

STUDY SELECTION

Two independent reviewers selected 51 advance directive statutes and 20 articles. Three independent legal reviewers selected 105 legal proceedings.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently assessed data sources and used critical content analysis to determine legal barriers to the clinical effectiveness of advance directives. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Legal and content-related barriers included poor readability (that is, laws in all states were written above a 12th-grade reading level), health care agent or surrogate restrictions (for example, 40 states did not include same-sex or domestic partners as default surrogates), and execution requirements needed to make forms legally valid (for example, 35 states did not allow oral advance directives, and 48 states required witness signatures, a notary public, or both). Vulnerable populations most likely to be affected by these barriers included patients with limited literacy, limited English proficiency, or both who cannot read or execute advance directives; same-sex or domestic partners who may be without legally valid and trusted surrogates; and unbefriended, institutionalized, or homeless patients who may be without witnesses and suitable surrogates.

LIMITATION

Only appellate-level legal cases were available, which may have excluded relevant cases.

CONCLUSION

Unintended negative consequences of advance directive legal restrictions may prevent all patients, and particularly vulnerable patients, from making and communicating their end-of-life wishes and having them honored. These restrictions have rendered advance directives less clinically useful. Recommendations include improving readability, allowing oral advance directives, and eliminating witness or notary requirements.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the Pfizer Foundation.

Compassionate release is a program that allows some eligible, seriously ill prisoners to die outside of prison before sentence completion. It became a matter of federal statute in 1984 and has been adopted by most U.S. prison jurisdictions. Incarceration is justified on 4 principles: retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence, and incapacitation. Compassionate release derives from the theory that changes in health status may affect these principles and thus alter justification for incarceration and sentence completion. The medical profession is intricately involved in this process because eligibility for consideration for compassionate release is generally based on medical evidence. Many policy experts are calling for broader use of compassionate release because of many factors, such as an aging prison population, overcrowding, the increasing deaths in custody, and the soaring medical costs of the criminal justice system. Even so, the medical eligibility criteria of many compassionate-release guidelines--which often assume a definitive prognosis--are clinically flawed, and procedural barriers may further limit their rational application. We propose changes to address these flaws.

Cultural attitudes about medical decision-making and filial expectations may lead some surrogates to experience stress and family conflict. Thirteen focus groups with racially and ethnically diverse English and Spanish speakers from county and Veterans Affairs hospitals, senior centers, and cancer support groups were conducted to describe participants' experiences making serious or end-of-life decisions for others. Filial expectations and family dynamics related to birth order and surrogate decision-making were explored using qualitative, thematic content analysis, and overarching themes from focus group transcripts were identified. The mean age of the 69 participants was 69 ± 14, and 29% were African American, 26% were white, 26% were Asian or Pacific Islander, and 19% were Latino. Seventy percent of participants engaged in unprompted discussions about birth order and family dynamics. Six subthemes were identified within three overarching categories: communication (unspoken expectations and discussion of death as taboo), emotion (emotional stress and feelings of loneliness), and conflict (family conflict and potential solutions to prevent conflict). These findings suggest that birth order and family dynamics can have profound effects on surrogate stress and coping. Clinicians should be aware of potential unspoken filial expectations for firstborns and help facilitate communication between the patient, surrogate, and extended family to reduce stress and conflict.

Correctional health research requires important safeguards to ensure that research participation is ethically conducted. In addition to having disproportionately low educational attainment and low literacy, incarcerated people suffer from health-related conditions that can affect cognition (e.g., traumatic brain injury, substance use disorders, mental illness). Yet modified informed consent processes that assess participants' comprehension of the risks and benefits of participation are not required by relevant federal guidelines. A push to assess comprehension of informed consent documents is particularly timely given an increase in demand for correctional health research in the context of criminal justice reform. We argue that comprehension assessments can identify persons who should be excluded from research and help those who will ultimately participate in studies better understand the risks and benefits of their participation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) and serrated polyp detection rate (SDR) vary significantly among colonoscopists. Colonoscopy inspection quality (CIQ) is the quality with which a colonoscopist inspects for polyps and may explain some of this variation. We aimed to determine the relationship between CIQ and historical ADRs and SDRs in a cohort of colonoscopists and assess whether there is variation in CIQ components (fold examination, cleaning, and luminal distension) among colonoscopists with similar ADRs and SDRs.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study to assess CIQ among 17 high-volume colonoscopists at an academic medical center. Over 6 weeks, we video-recorded >28 colonoscopies per colonoscopist and randomly selected 7 colonoscopies per colonoscopist for evaluation. Six raters graded CIQ using an established scale, with a maximum whole colon score of 75.

RESULTS

We evaluated 119 colonoscopies. The median whole-colon CIQ score was 50.1/75. Whole-colon CIQ score (r=0.71; P<.01) and component scores (fold examination r=0.74; cleaning r=0.67; distension r=0.77; all P<.01) correlated with ADR. Proximal colon CIQ score (r=0.67; P<.01) and component scores (fold examination r=0.71; cleaning r=0.62; distension r=0.65; all P<.05) correlated with SDR. CIQ component scores differed significantly between colonoscopists with similar ADRs and SDRs for most of the CIQ skills.

CONCLUSION

In a prospective observational study, we found CIQ and CIQ components to correlate with ADR and SDR. Colonoscopists with similar ADRs and SDRs differ in their performance of the 3 CIQ components-specific, actionable feedback might improve colonoscopy technique.