Poor numeracy skills were common in patients with diabetes. Low diabetes-related numeracy skills were associated with worse perceived self-efficacy, fewer self-management behaviors, and possibly poorer glycemic control.

As the science of quality improvement in health care advances, the importance of sharing its accomplishments through the published literature increases. Current reporting of improvement work in health care varies widely in both content and quality. It is against this backdrop that a group of stakeholders from a variety of disciplines has created the Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence, which we refer to as the SQUIRE publication guidelines or SQUIRE statement. The SQUIRE statement consists of a checklist of 19 items that authors need to consider when writing articles that describe formal studies of quality improvement. Most of the items in the checklist are common to all scientific reporting, but virtually all of them have been modified to reflect the unique nature of medical improvement work.This “Explanation and Elaboration” document (E & E) is a companion to the SQUIRE statement. For each item in the SQUIRE guidelines the E & E document provides one or two examples from the published improvement literature, followed by an analysis of the ways in which the example expresses the intent of the guideline item. As with the E & E documents created to accompany other biomedical publication guidelines, the purpose of the SQUIRE E & E document is to assist authors along the path from completion of a quality improvement project to its publication. The SQUIRE statement itself, this E & E document, and additional information about reporting improvement work can be found at http://www.squire-statement.org.

Limited health literacy is common in the United States and associates with poor clinical outcomes. Little is known about the effect of health literacy in patients with advanced kidney disease. In this prospective cohort study we describe the prevalence of limited health literacy and examine its association with the risk for mortality in hemodialysis patients. We enrolled 480 incident chronic hemodialysis patients from 77 dialysis clinics between 2005 and 2007 and followed them until April 2008. Measured using the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine, 32% of patients had limited (Ͻ9th grade reading level) and 68% had adequate health literacy (Ն9th grade reading level). Limited health literacy was more likely in patients who were male and non-white and who had fewer years of education. Compared with adequate literacy, limited health literacy associated with a higher risk for death (HR 1.54; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.36) even after adjustment for age, sex, race, and diabetes. In summary, limited health literacy is common and associates with higher mortality in chronic hemodialysis patients. Addressing health literacy may improve survival for these patients.

BackgroundLow literacy and numeracy skills are common. Adequate numeracy skills are crucial in the management of diabetes. Diabetes patients use numeracy skills to interpret glucose meters, administer medications, follow dietary guidelines and other tasks. Existing literacy scales may not be adequate to assess numeracy skills. This paper describes the development and psychometric properties of the Diabetes Numeracy Test (DNT), the first scale to specifically measure numeracy skills used in diabetes.MethodsThe items of the DNT were developed by an expert panel and refined using cognitive response interviews with potential respondents. The final version of the DNT (43 items) and other relevant measures were administered to a convenience sample of 398 patients with diabetes. Internal reliability was determined by the Kuder-Richardson coefficient (KR-20). An a priori hypothetical model was developed to determine construct validity. A shortened 15-item version, the DNT15, was created through split sample analysis.ResultsThe DNT had excellent internal reliability (KR-20 = 0.95). The DNT was significantly correlated (p < 0.05) with education, income, literacy and math skills, and diabetes knowledge, supporting excellent construct validity. The mean score on the DNT was 61% and took an average of 33 minutes to complete. The DNT15 also had good internal reliability (KR-20 = 0.90 and 0.89). In split sample analysis, correlations of the DNT-15 with the full DNT in both sub-samples was high (rho = 0.96 and 0.97, respectively).ConclusionThe DNT is a reliable and valid measure of diabetes related numeracy skills. An equally adequate but more time-efficient version of the DNT, the DNT15, can be used for research and clinical purposes to evaluate diabetes related numeracy.