The Effectiveness of Self-Management Interventions for Individuals with Low Health Literacy and/or Low Income: A Descriptive Systematic Review
With the burden of chronic illness increasing globally, self-management is a crucial strategy in reducing healthcare costs and increasing patient quality of life. Low income and low health literacy are both associated with poorer health outcomes and higher rates of chronic disease. Thus, self-management represents an important healthcare strategy for these populations. The purpose of this study is to review self-management interventions in populations with low income or low health literacy and synthesize the efficacy of these interventions.
A systematic review of trials evaluating the efficacy of self-management interventions in populations with low income or low health literacy diagnosed with a chronic illness was conducted. Electronic databases were primarily searched to identify eligible studies. Data were extracted and efficacy summarized by self-management skills, outcomes, and content tailoring.
23 studies were reviewed, with ten reporting an overall positive effect on at least one primary outcome. Effective interventions most often included problem-solving as well as taking action and/or resource utilization. A wide range of health-related outcomes were considered, were efficacious empowerment and disease-specific quality of life were found to be significant. The efficacy of interventions did not seem to vary by duration, format, or mode of delivery or whether these included individuals with low health literacy and/or low income. Tailoring did not seem to impact on efficacy.
Findings suggest that self-management interventions in populations with low income or low health literacy are most effective when three to four self-management skills are utilized, particularly when problem-solving is targeted. Healthcare providers and researchers can use these findings to develop education strategies and tools for populations with low income or low health literacy to improve chronic illness self-management.
KEY WORDSself-management chronic disease disease management vulnerable populations health literacy
We wish to acknowledge Drs. Lisa Merry and Argerie Tsimicalis of McGill University for their guidance and support in the preparation of this systematic review. Preliminary results were presented in the form of an e-poster in a Graduate level class on research methods in Nursing at McGill University, and an abstract was presented (poster presentation) at the Health Literacy Annual Research Conference (HARC) in October 2016 (title: The effectiveness of tailoring self-management interventions for individuals with low health literacy or low income: A systematic review). There has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. Sylvie Lambert was supported by a Canada Research Chair (Tier 2).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
- 1.Wu S-Y, Green A. Projection of chronic illness prevalence and cost inflation. Santa Monica: RAND Health 2000, 18.Google Scholar
- 9.Adams K, Greiner AC, Corrigan JM. 1st Annual Crossing the Quality Chasm Summit: A focus on communities. Washington DC: National Academies Press, 2004.Google Scholar
- 17.Eichner J, Blumenthal D. Medicare in the 21st Century: Building a Better Chronic Care System. National Academy of Social Insurance; 2003. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.555632.
- 21.Canadian Public Health Association. Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Can J Public Health. 1986; 77:425–430.Google Scholar
- 22.DeNavas-Walt C, Proctor BD, Smith JC. US Census Bureau, Current population reports, P60–245, income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2012, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 2013.Google Scholar
- 25.World Health Organization. Noncommunicable diseases. Retrieved October 2, 2015 from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs355/en/
- 26.Mikkonen J, Raphael D. Social determinants of health: The Canadian facts. Toronto: York University School of Health Policy and Management. 2010. Available at http://thecanadianfacts.org/The_Canadian_Facts.pdf.
- 27.Kutner M, Greenburg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-483). U.S. Department ofEducation. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 2006.Google Scholar
- 28.Rootman I, Gordon-El-Bihbety D. A vision for a health literate Canada report of the Expert Panel on Health Literacy. Ottawa: Canadian Public Health Association, 2008.Google Scholar
- 30.Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.0 [updated February 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2008. Available: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org/. Accessed 15 February 2016.
- 32.Blundell M. Understanding and synthesizing my numerical data. In A. Boland, M. G. Cherry and R. Dickson (eds), Doing a systematic review—A student’s guide. Los Angeles, Sage, 2014.Google Scholar
- 33.Bos-Touwen I, Jonkman N, Westland H, et al. Tailoring of self-management interventions in patients with heart failure. Current Heart Failure Reports, 2015, 12(3):223-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11897-015-0259-3.
- 34.Cohen JH. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 1988.Google Scholar
- 58.US Department of Health and Human Services. The Poverty Guidelines Updated Periodically in the Federal Register. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services. 2015, 42.Google Scholar
- 62.Savery JR. Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisc J Probl-Based Learn 2006, 1:9–20.Google Scholar
- 65.Auerbach JA, Krimgold BK. Income, socioeconomic status, and health: exploring the relationships. Washington DC: National Policy Association, 2001.Google Scholar
- 69.Campbell MK, Quintiliani LM. Tailored interventions in public health. Where does tailoring fit in interventions to reduce health disparities? Am Behav Sci 2006, 49: 1–19.Google Scholar