Organisational Health Literacy (OHL)-interventions are needed to overcome health inequality. OHL-interventions have successfully identified communication barriers at the organisational level, but evidence is limited on the extent to which this leads to sustainable organisational change. This study aims to assess the implementation fidelity, moderators (barriers and facilitators), and long-term impact of OHL-interventions in hospitals in Ireland and The Netherlands. We used a longitudinal mixed-methods approach to assess two similar OHL-interventions in one Irish and three Dutch hospitals. The OHL-interventions concerned the improvement of navigation and implementation of health literacy-friendly communication throughout organisations. Participants were 24 hospital employees and 40 older adults who use hospital services. At six, eight, and eighteen months, we assessed the level of implementation, barriers and facilitators, and impact through questionnaires and in-depth semi-structured interviews. After older adults and professionals had identified a number of communication problems, we found that professionals had successfully implemented OHL-interventions to promote navigation and comprehensible communication. Limited resources and variation in organisational structures and procedures were perceived as barriers to implementation. The participation of service users, leadership support, and a stepwise implementation of interventions were perceived to facilitate implementation. In the long term, the OHL-interventions led to system-wide improvements, as shown by better embedding of health literacy policies, enhanced patient engagement, provision of plain language training and comprehensible information. Findings were similar for the two countries. Embedded OHL-interventions resulted in sustainable and system-wide health literacy changes in all four hospitals. Following implementation, OHL-interventions have the potential to promote health equity and empowerment among health service users.
PurposeThis paper presents an exploration of parents', teachers' and childrens' perspectives on children's understanding of well being with the aim of illuminating and comparing the conceptualisation of well being from these three perspectives.
MethodologyThe participatory method developed to undertake this study stems from our adaption of the 'draw and write' technique, with children taking photographs rather than drawing and participating in data analysis. Children aged 8 12 years took 723 photographs representing well being, while a second set of children grouped the photographs into categories. A third set organised these categories, developing and illustrating through schema the pattern of relationships between categories. This process was repeated for parent and teacher groups drawing on the photographs taken by the children.
FindingsSixsmith et al. Children's, Parents' and Teachers' Perceptions of Child Well being.In Press, Health Education, Vol. 107, 2007. 3 Differences emerged between parents and teachers and children and adults. Parents provided a more detailed conceptualisation than teachers. Children included pets where adults perceived school as more important in children's well being. The identification of the differing perspectives between children and adults suggests that this approach has enabled children to illuminate their own unique perspective on well being. It also demonstrates that children can express complex understandings of abstract concepts.
Practical ImplicationsThe findings reinforce the need to gain children's perspectives rather than relying on adult perceptions of children's perspectives, in order to inform quality service, practice and policy developments.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.