老人健康檢查族群衛教素材適用性評估— 以台北市某醫學中心為例

Suitability Assessment of Health Education Materials for Elderly Health Check-up Examinees in a Medical Center in Taipei City

目的：過去研究顯示高齡族群之健康識能多有不足，恐不易理解正確健康醫療訊息而增加醫療成本，以及較差的健康狀態。為了解現行衛教單張於老人之適用性，本研究按照「健康識能友善素材評值指標使用指引」，修改某醫學中心常見慢性疾病的衛教單張，邀請長者親自評估改版前後差異，探討目前衛教教材的改善空間。

方法：本研究為橫斷性研究，以便利取樣方式，自2022年6月24日至12月31日到某醫學中心接受老人健康檢查的民眾，年齡65歲以上共93位納入研究。研究對象利用健康識能友善教材評值指標評分表，評估改版前後的三種衛教單張（高血壓、糖尿病、高血脂），比較適用性程度是否有差異，並使用複迴歸探討基本資料對三種衛教單張改版後分數以及改版前後分數差異之影響。

結果：研究結果發現，三種衛教單張，改版前就已符合適用性教材(>70分)（高血壓：76.84, SD=14.23；糖尿病：78.12, SD=11.21；高血脂：77.51, SD=11.06），但改版後適用性分數（高血壓：93.52, SD=8.67；糖尿病: 96.07, SD=5.76；高血脂：92.35, SD=5.24）明顯高於改版前，其變化程度皆達顯著差異(p<0.05)。另發現無法利用研究對象的性別、年齡、教育程度來預測衛教單張適用性分數。

結論：此次衛教單張改版後於老人健康檢查族群更具適用性，更符合健康識能友善標準，有助於長者閱讀與應用健康訊息，未來可將該方法應用於機構發展友善衛教單張，產出符合需求且更能被理解的資訊。

 

Purpose: Previous studies have shown that older adults often have limited health literacy, which may hinder their understanding of accurate health and medical information and result in increased healthcare costs and poor health outcome. In order to assess the suitability of current health education brochures for older adults, this study consulted the "Guidelines for Evaluating Health Literacy-Friendly Materials" to revise health education brochures on common chronic diseases in a medical center. Elderly individuals were invited to personally evaluate the differences before and after the revision, aiming to identify areas in need of improvement in the current versions of the examined health education brochures.

Methods: The study was a cross-sectional research using convenience sampling. A total of 93 elderly individuals (aged 65 years and above) receiving health examinations at a medical center between June 24, 2022, and December 31, 2022 were recruited. The study participants used the Health Literacy-Friendly Materials Evaluation Form to assess health education brochures on three diseases (hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia) and compare the pre- and post-revision versions in terms of suitability. Multiple regression analysis was used to investigate the impact of demographic characteristics on the post-revision scores of the three brochures and the differences in scores before and after the revision.

Results: The results revealed that, while the pre-revision brochures already met the suitability criteria (hypertension: 76.84, SD=14.23; diabetes: 78.12, SD=11.21; and hyperlipidemia: 77.51, SD=11.06), the post-revision versions reported a significantly greater suitability (p<0.05; hypertension: 93.52, SD=8.67; diabetes: 96.07, SD=5.76; hyperlipidemia: 92.35, SD=5.24). Furthermore, gender, age, and education level of the study participants were not significantly correlated to the suitability scores of the health education brochures.

Conclusion: The revision does enhance the friendliness of the brochures in terms of health literacy, making them more suitable for the elderly health check-up examinees to understand and utilize the communicated health information. In the future, this patient-centered method can be applied to help develop user-friendly health education brochures better capable of meeting the needs of the elderly population.