Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

What an Informed Patient Means for the Future of Healthcare

  • Review Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Professionalism is the basis of medicine’s contract with society, and the principle of patient autonomy is a fundamental value of our profession. Physicians must respect patient autonomy by being honest and empowering patients to make informed decisions about their health.

What information do patients need to understand in order to be able to take care of their health? How do we make sure that information is adequately communicated so that everyone who needs it can access and understand it? Health literacy is increasingly recognised as essential for successful access, navigation, self-care and management of health and wellness in America. Unfortunately, there is a large gap between the literacy demands of the health system and the health literacy skills of most Americans. A recent Institute of Medicine report concludes that nearly half of American adults have difficulty understanding and acting upon health information. Low health literacy is associated with less knowledge of diseases and self-care, worse self-management skills, lower medication compliance rates, higher rates of hospitalisation and worse health outcomes.

Health literacy problems are magnified as patients are increasingly asked to take more responsibility for their health in a healthcare system that is increasingly complex, specialised and technologically sophisticated. Most would agree that is it hard to be a patient these days; health literacy is needed for navigating and understanding what you need to do. Improving health literacy is essential for improving quality, reducing disparities and reducing costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ABIM Foundation. American Board of Internal Medicine; ACP-ASIM Foundation. American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine; European Federation of Internal Medicine. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136(3): 243–6

    Google Scholar 

  2. Frist WH. Shattuck lecture: health care in the 21st century. N Engl J Med 2005; 352(3): 267–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ratzan S, Parker R. Introduction — current bibliographies in medicine: health literacy January 1990 through October 1999. Bethesda (MD): National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2000. NLM Publication No. CBM 2000-1

    Google Scholar 

  4. Council on Scientific Affairs for the American Medical Association. Health literacy: report for the AMA council on scientific affairs. JAMA 1999; 281(6): 552–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Health literacy: a prescription to end confusion. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academies, 2004

  6. Kirsch I, Jungeblut A, Jenkins L, et al. Adult literacy in America: a first look at the results of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  7. Parker RM, Ratzan SC, Lurie N. Health literacy: a policy challenge for advancing high-quality health care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2003; 22(4): 147–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gazmararian J, Baker D, Williams M, et al. Health literacy among Medicare enrollees in a managed care organization. JAMA 1999; 281(6): 545–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Berkman N, DeWalt D, Pignone M. Literacy and health outcomes. Evidence report/technology assessment no. 87. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2004. AHRQ Publication No. 04-007-2

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schwartzberg JG, VanGeest JB, Wang CC. Understanding health literacy: implications for medicine and public health. Chicago (IL): American Medical Association Press, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  11. The Medicare Drug Benefit: beneficiary perspectives just before implementation. 6/29/06 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/med111005pkg.cfm. [Accessed 2005 Dec 15]

  12. Edwards RT. Blind faith and choice. Health Aff (Millwood) 2005; 24(6): 1624–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. DeWalt DA, Beckman ND, Sheridan S, et al. Literacy and health outcomes: a systematic review of the literature. J Gen Intern Med 2004; 19: 1228–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pignone MP, DeWalt DA, Sheridan S, et al. Interventions to improve health outcomes for patients with low literacy: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2005; 20: 185–92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruth M. Parker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Parker, R.M. What an Informed Patient Means for the Future of Healthcare. PharmacoEconomics 24 (Suppl 2), 29–33 (2006). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624002-00004

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624002-00004

Keywords

Navigation