9 Million Kaiser Permanente Discussion Board And

Provide a summary of your findings and any insights you have gained in the review of the information.( READ the attached file)

initial post is 600 words

replies are 475 words

apa style and cite the Bible in all also

For your replies, respond to 2 classmates, identifying at least 1 strength and 1 weakness in each classmate’s reasoning.

respond to classmate #1

Health literacy is a broad term with many different definitions. One definition of health literacy is “the motivation and ability to access, understand, and use information in ways which promote and maintain good health” (Benyon, 2014). In other words, health literacy helps to determine an individual’s health outcomes based on their high or low health literacy level. Health literacy affects a variety of issues including “doctor/patient relationship, adherence to medications, implementation of the management plan, self-management of chronic illness, hospital admissions, emergency department attendances, health inequalities, and lifestyle behaviors” (Benyon, 2014). Furthermore, health literacy is critical as it helps individuals understand a myriad of things from insurance paperwork in health care to preventative care and disease management.

Nowadays, a person’s medical record is not kept in one location and therefore sometimes it can either get lost or mixed around. A solution to this is for a patient to have a personal health record, or PHR. A PHR is “an electronic, lifelong resource of health information needed by individuals to make health decisions” (Noblin, Wan, & Fottler, 2012). A PHR would not only help eliminate this problem but also improve patient/doctor communication and allow the patient to have more involvement in their health. An example of a PHR is the one that Kaiser Permanente Hospital uses called My Health Manager. This PHR provides “secure messaging with healthcare providers, online appointment scheduling and prescription refills” (Nelson & Staggers, 2018). Over 3.9 million Kaiser Permanente members use this and over 12 million messages have been sent as well as more than 68 million test results viewed. Although, adopting and using a PHR has been difficult to implement for healthcare professionals. Limitations to adopting a PHR include: the influence of office staff to try to “sell” or “not sell” the idea of a PHR, patients wanting to please a physician and therefore providing false answers, and the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) questionnaire only being provided in one language (English). The eHEALS is used as a tool to see how patient’s skills and knowledge would allow them to use electronic healthcare (e-health) information.

According to The impact of health literacy on a patient’s decision to adopt a personal health record, a patient’s attitude about their ability to find, use, and evaluate e-health meant that the more favorable the reaction, the more willing the patient would be to adopt and use the PHR (Noblin, Wan, & Fottler, 2012). This article also mention that subjective norms play a role in how a patient will adopt the PHR. Subjective norms mean that the more others of influence feel that something is important, the more likely the individual will change their behavior.

Two different hypotheses were addressed regarding PHR. The first hypothesis states that patients who are younger, educated, and of affluent backgrounds are more willing to adopt the PHR, as opposed to individuals who are older, less educated, and have less money. The second hypothesis states that patients with high levels of e-health literacy are more likely to adopt the PHR as opposed to those with lower levels. The results of the previously mentioned two hypotheses indicated that the first hypothesis was not supported and the second hypothesis was supported based on the responses of eHEALS.

In the study regarding health literacy and PHR, 562 patients were sampled over the course of six weeks. The patient’s adoption of PHR as well as their health literacy was evaluated. Results showed that 74% of the participants would adopt the PHR, of that percentage, patients 41-55 years old were among the most common age group. Over half the patients sampled had a high school education or less and a little less than two-thirds of the patients were of low socioeconomic (less than $20,000 a year) background. The results of the eHEALS (8 questions that assess the patient’s level of using technology for e-health) revealed that 65% of the patients who wanted to adopt a PHR as well as 38% of patients who didn’t want to take a PHR all had high perceived health literacy levels. 35% of patients who didn’t want to take a PHR had a low perceived health literacy level.

In conclusion, PHR’s are useful as it is a “customizable, personalized record of anything that pertains to an individual’s healthcare” (Kupchunas, 2007). The adoption of a PHR will help patients not only have access to their health records but also allow them to make better-informed decisions about their health. I believe that PHR’s are the way of the future and that it is a great thing. As it states in 2 Corinthians, “therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17, English Standard Version). I think that PHR’s are a great idea and I look forward to seeing how they will be further implemented and used by patients.

respond to classmate #2

Access to the internet has dramatically grown over the years thereby awarding a huge strength to the capacity of the internet to expand health care delivery. Research has shown that, “seeking information related to the users’ health concerns, including disease, disease management, medications, or home treatment alternatives ranks as the second most popular reason given for Internet use” (Lee, et.al 2006. p.25).
The advancement in health information technologies is another reason for the continuous evolvement of the definition of PHRs. “The National Alliance for Health Information Technology has defined a PHR as an electronic record of health-related information on an individual that conforms to nationally recognized interoperability standards and that can be drawn from multiple sources while being managed, shared, and controlled by the individual” (Kim & Nahm, 2012). Lee et.al (2009) identified the concept of the PHR as those that “includes an electronic application enabling individuals to access and manage their own lifelong health information, and to share all or parts of such information with other individuals or care providers or authorized persons in a secure and confidential environment”. Looking at more literature, “The Markle Foundation’s Common Framework states that the key characteristics of a PHR are that the patient controls his or her own PHR, that the information is from the patient’s entire lifetime, the PHR contains information from all providers, is accessible from anywhere at any time, and is both private and secure” (Kannry, et.al.2012. p. 594).

Health literacy is defined as “The degree to which individuals have the capacity to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions” (Michael K. Paasche-Orlow, 2010). Nelson & Staggers (2018) states that health literacy is the degree to which individuals have the capacity to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions. Additionally, the WHO defines health literacy as “ the cognitive and social skills that determine the motivation and ability of individuals to gain access to, understand, and use information in ways which promote and maintain good health”

Literacy is the essential basic for health literacy and individual’s life reflects the relationship with health and literacy. WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health recognized that, literacy as having a key role in deciding health inequalities in both developed and undeveloped countries. A person’s level of health literacy is based on their age, education level, socioeconomic standing, and cultural background. Patients with low health literacy have a more difficult time navigating the health care system. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, this group of patients may find it harder to find medical services and health care providers, fill out health forms, provide their complete medical history with their providers, seek preventative care, understand the health risks associated with some behaviors, taking care of chronic health conditions, and understanding how to take prescribed medications (About health literacy, 2014).

Health literacy affects one’s ability to fill out forms, knowing location of services, can make sharing own personal information difficult such as past health records and past medications, if level of health literacy is poor, and affects one’s ability to have the knowledge of the benefits and risks associated with treatment. It involves numerous and also requires the knowledge of health topics. People that lack knowledge have problems with negotiating the nature and causes of disease, not only that but one may not understand the relationship between lifestyle factors and health outcomes, and this can prove to be fatal. Put simply, low health literacy has been linked with lower health outcomes, with a higher rate of hospitalization and less use of preventative services.

“Better physician-patient communication and increased patient involvement in decision making are vital components of a successful self-management program with improved patient outcomes and overall satisfaction with care” ( Noblin, Wan & Fottler, 2012, P.1)

In their study, Nobin et al (2012) utilized two hypothesis to determine the effect of health literacy and the use of PHR’s.

• Hypothesis 1: Patients who are younger, are more educated, and have higher income are more willing to adopt the PHR than those who are older, less educated, and with lower income.
• Hypothesis 2: Patients who have high levels of e-health literacy are more willing to adopt the PHR than those with low levels of e-health literacy.

It was a 6 week study which in summary concluded that high levels of health literacy, and patient having a perceived health literacy increased the likelihood of the use of PHR. A limitation for the study was that it utilized only English speakers so there’s reason to believe that the conclusions may be inaccurate.

Some recent works suggest that there is a relation between literacy, low health and premature deaths (Zarcadoolas et al, 2005). Health literacy plays a key role on the overall health and wellbeing. Multiple factors like proper usage of health care services, communication of health issues with health care providers, leading healthy lifestyle, good hygienic conditions, taking preventive measures like immunization, which might show to impact an individual’s physical and mental wellbeing are directly or indirectly associated with health literacy. It is therefore suggested that promoting health literacy will make a healthy community, and it should be considered as a primary public health goal. PHR is about the future and the Bible says that “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.” Jeremiah 29:11