Behavioural barriers to COVID-19 testing in Australia: Two national surveys to identify barriers and estimate prevalence by health literacy level

Background: COVID-19 testing and contact tracing has been crucial in Australia's prevention strategy. However, testing for COVID-19 is far from optimal, and behavioural barriers are unknown. Study 1 aimed to identify the range of barriers to testing. Study 2 aimed to estimate prevalence in a nationally relevant sample to target interventions. Methods: Study 1: National longitudinal COVID-19 survey from April-November 2020. Testing barriers were included in the June survey (n=1369). Open responses were coded using the COM-B framework (capability-opportunity-motivation). Study 2: Barriers from Study 1 were presented to a new nationally representative sample in November to estimate prevalence (n=2869). Barrier prevalence was analysed by health literacy level using Chi square tests. Results: Study 1: 49% strongly agreed to get tested for symptoms, and 69% would self-isolate. Concern about pain was the top barrier from a provided list (11%), but 32 additional barriers were identified from open responses and coded to the COM-B framework. Study 2: The most prevalent barriers were motivation issues (e.g. don't believe symptoms are COVID-19: 28%, few local cases: 18%). Capability issues were also common (e.g. not sure symptoms are bad enough: 19%, not sure whether symptoms need testing: 15%). Many barriers were more prevalent amongst people with low compared to high health literacy, including motivation (preference to self isolate: 21% vs 12%, pain: 15% vs 9%) and capability (not sure symptom needs testing: 12% vs 8%, not sure how to test:11% vs 4%). Conclusion: Even in a health system with free and widespread access to COVID-19 testing, motivation and capability barriers were prevalent issues, particularly for people with lower health literacy. This study highlights the important of diagnosing behaviour barriers to target public health interventions for COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Does Health Literacy Make a Difference? Comparing the Effect of Conventional Medicine Versus Homeopathic Prescribing on Treatment Credibility and Expectancy

ObjectiveWhile homeopathic remedies are often used to treat non-specific complaints such as headaches, empirical evidence suggests their treatment effect is due to the placebo effect. Low health literacy seems to be connected to higher use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The aim of this study was to examine what people with occasional headaches expect from conventional medicine or homeopathic remedies and if health literacy interacts with this expectation.MethodsIn this experimental study, n = 582 participants with occasional headaches were randomized to read one of two vignettes, which described the prescription of either conventional medicine or a homeopathic remedy. Subsequently, the participants were asked to rate treatment credibility and expectancy with regard to their assigned vignette. Health literacy was assessed as a potential moderator.ResultsParticipants in the conventional medicine group rated treatment credibility and expectancy higher than in the homeopathic remedy group. Moderation analysis revealed that when being offered conventional medicine, participant reports of treatment credibility and expectancy decreased with lower health literacy, while these outcomes increased with lower health literacy for homeopathic remedies.DiscussionPeople with occasional headaches estimate the effectiveness of conventional medication properly. However, health care professionals should pay special attention to patients with low health literacy, as they might need more time and information to give their informed consent.

COVID-19 Is Connected with Lower Health Literacy in Rural Areas

The relationship between social determinants of health (SDoH) and health outcomes is established and extends to a higher risk of contracting COVID-19. Given the factors included in SDoH, such as education level, race, rurality, and socioeconomic status are interconnected, it is unclear how individual SDoH factors may uniquely impact risk. Lower socioeconomic status often occurs in concert with lower educational attainment, for example. Because literacy provides access to information needed to avoid infection and content can be made more accessible, it is essential to determine to what extent health literacy contributes to successful containment of a pandemic. By incorporating this information into clinical data, we have isolated literacy and geographic location as SDoH factors uniquely related to the risk of COVID-19 infection. For patients with comorbidities linked to higher illness severity, residents of rural areas associated with lower health literacy at the zip code level had a greater likelihood of positive COVID-19 results unrelated to their economic status.

Low health numeracy is associated with higher disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus

Objective Evidence suggests low health literacy is prevalent in the United States and associated with worse clinical outcomes, yet few studies have investigated health literacy in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of low health literacy and numeracy in lupus patients and to examine its association with disease characteristics. Methods Patients with SLE were recruited from an academic center clinic. Participants completed in-person assessments of health literacy (Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine, REALM) and numeracy (Numeracy Understanding in Medicine Instrument Shortened Version, S-NUMi). Clinical disease activity measures were obtained, including urine protein to creatinine ratio (UPC), Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) and physician global assessment (PhGA) scores. Results Ninety-five SLE patients participated in the study; 13% had low health literacy and 73% had limited health numeracy. Patients with lower health literacy and numeracy were more likely to be Black, have Medicaid insurance, and earn income <$50 K annually. In linear regression models, patients with limited health numeracy had, on average, PhGA scores 0.31 points higher (95% CI: 0.02, 0.60) than patients with adequate numeracy, after adjusting for race and age. No clinical outcomes were associated with health literacy. Conclusion In this exploratory study, we found SLE patients with low numeracy had higher disease activity. Our findings indicate that lower health literacy and numeracy are more common among Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients. Additional research will be needed to investigate the impact of health literacy on other outcomes and racial disparities in SLE.

Citizen Responses to Government Restrictions in Switzerland During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Survey

Background The success of government-recommended mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic depends largely on information uptake and implementation by individual citizens. Objective Our aim was to assess citizens’ knowledge and perceptions about COVID-19 recommendations in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland. Methods A cross-sectional electronic survey with open and closed questions was disseminated by community-based partners prior to the relaxation of government restrictions. Outcomes included citizen knowledge (9-question measure) and worry about the virus, perception of government measures, and recommendations for improvements. Comparisons used linear regression, controlling for age, sex, education, and health literacy. Free-text answers were analyzed thematically. Results Of 807 people who accessed the survey, 684 (85%) completed all questions and 479 (60%) gave free-text recommendations. Overall, 75% were female, the mean age was 48 years, and 93% had high health literacy. Knowledge scores were high, with a median score of 8 out of 9. Mean levels of worry about the COVID-19 pandemic were higher in women than men (55/100 versus 44/100, P<.001), and in respondents with lower health literacy (57/100 versus 52/100, P=.03). Self-reported adherence to recommendations was high (85%) and increased with age and worry (both P<.001). Respondents rated their own adherence higher than others (85% versus 61%, P<.001). Moreover, 34% of respondents reported having self-quarantined; this rose to 52% for those aged ≥75 years. Those who had self-quarantined reported higher levels of fear. Nearly half (49%) of respondents felt the government response had been adequate, though younger age and higher levels of worry were associated with considering the response to be insufficient (both P<.001). Analysis of open-text answers revealed 4 major themes: access to and use of masks, gloves, and hand sanitizer; government messaging; lockdown and lockdown exit plan communication; and testing for COVID-19. Conclusions Knowledge, adherence, and satisfaction regarding government recommendations and response were high in this sample, but many desired greater access to personal protective equipment. Those with lower health literacy and those who have been in self-isolation reported greater concerns about the pandemic.

Disparities in COVID-19 related knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours by health literacy

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo explore the variation in understanding, attitudes and uptake of COVID-19 health advice during the 2020 pandemic lockdown by health literacy.Study designNational cross sectional community survey.SettingAustralian general public.ParticipantsAdults aged over 18 years (n = 4362).Main outcome measuresKnowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to COVID-19; health literacy and socio-demographic factors.ResultsPeople with inadequate health literacy had poorer understanding of COVID-19 symptoms (49% vs 68%; p<0.001), were less able to identify behaviours to prevent infection (59% vs 72%; p<0.001), and experienced more difficulty finding information and understanding government messaging about COVID-19 than people with adequate health literacy. They were less likely to rate social distancing as important (6.1 vs 6.5, p<0.001) and reported more difficulty remembering/accessing medication since lockdown (3.6 vs 2.7, p<0.001). Importantly there was higher endorsement of misinformation beliefs related to COVID-19 and vaccination in people with lower health literacy. Similar results were observed among people who primarily speak a language other than English at home.ConclusionOur findings show important disparities by health literacy and language in COVID-19 related knowledge, attitudes and behaviours that have the potential to undermine efforts to reduce viral transmission and may lead to social inequalities in health outcomes in Australia. Those with the greatest burden of chronic disease are most disadvantaged, and most likely to experience severe disease and die from COVID-19. Addressing the health literacy needs of the community in public health messaging about COVID-19 must now be a priority in Australia.

Citizen Responses to Government Restrictions in Switzerland During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Survey (Preprint)

BACKGROUND The success of government-recommended mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic depends largely on information uptake and implementation by individual citizens. OBJECTIVE Our aim was to assess citizens’ knowledge and perceptions about COVID-19 recommendations in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland. METHODS A cross-sectional electronic survey with open and closed questions was disseminated by community-based partners prior to the relaxation of government restrictions. Outcomes included citizen knowledge (9-question measure) and worry about the virus, perception of government measures, and recommendations for improvements. Comparisons used linear regression, controlling for age, sex, education, and health literacy. Free-text answers were analyzed thematically. RESULTS Of 807 people who accessed the survey, 684 (85%) completed all questions and 479 (60%) gave free-text recommendations. Overall, 75% were female, the mean age was 48 years, and 93% had high health literacy. Knowledge scores were high, with a median score of 8 out of 9. Mean levels of worry about the COVID-19 pandemic were higher in women than men (55/100 versus 44/100, <i>P</i>&lt;.001), and in respondents with lower health literacy (57/100 versus 52/100, <i>P</i>=.03). Self-reported adherence to recommendations was high (85%) and increased with age and worry (both <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Respondents rated their own adherence higher than others (85% versus 61%, <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Moreover, 34% of respondents reported having self-quarantined; this rose to 52% for those aged ≥75 years. Those who had self-quarantined reported higher levels of fear. Nearly half (49%) of respondents felt the government response had been adequate, though younger age and higher levels of worry were associated with considering the response to be insufficient (both <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Analysis of open-text answers revealed 4 major themes: access to and use of masks, gloves, and hand sanitizer; government messaging; lockdown and lockdown exit plan communication; and testing for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS Knowledge, adherence, and satisfaction regarding government recommendations and response were high in this sample, but many desired greater access to personal protective equipment. Those with lower health literacy and those who have been in self-isolation reported greater concerns about the pandemic.