Natavio Melissa F, Cortessis Victoria K, Zite Nikki B, Ciesielski Katharine, Eggers Hilary, Brown Niquelle, Segall-Gutierrez Penina
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California; Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California; Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
Contraception. 2018 Jun;97(6):546-551. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.02.005. Epub 2018 Mar 26.
To learn whether a version of the Medicaid Sterilization Consent Form (SCF) adapted for populations of low-literacy can help Spanish-speaking women better understand the process and consequences of tubal sterilization.
We randomly assigned Spanish-speaking women, ages 21-45 years, to review either a "standard" or "low-literacy" version of the Medicaid SCF. We assessed sterilization-related knowledge using items from the Postpartum Tubal Sterilization Knowledge questionnaire, using as the primary outcome correct identification of least four or more knowledge items and as secondary outcome participants' preferred version of the SCF.
Overall sterilization-related knowledge was low in both groups, with 33% of women (n=100) who reviewed the standard SCF form and 42% of those who reviewed the low-literacy form (n=100) correctly identifying four or more knowledge-related items (p=.19). Regarding specific items, women in the low-literacy SCF group were more likely than those in the standard SCF group to understand the permanence of sterilization (69% versus 49%, p<.01) and the time requirement between signing the consent document and undergoing sterilization (79% versus 59%, p<.01). The groups were similar in appreciating availability of equally effective nonpermanent contraceptive options (71% versus 64%, p=.29), time from signing to expiration (33% versus 38%, p=.46), or non-binding nature of sterilization consent (55% versus 62%, p=.32). Overall, 71% of participants from both groups preferred the low-literacy form.
In our patient population, characterized by low educational attainment and inadequate health literacy skills, a low-literacy SCF did not improve overall sterilization-related knowledge when compared to the standard SCF. The low-literacy version did improve understanding of the permanence of sterilization and time requirements to undergo the procedure.
Neither form conveyed an adequate level of knowledge to this vulnerable Spanish-speaking population. Therefore, a considerable need persists for detailed education regarding availability of equally effective reversible contraceptive options, procedure-related risks, and permanence of sterilization throughout the process of informed consent.
了解一种为低识字率人群改编的医疗补助绝育同意书(SCF)版本是否能帮助讲西班牙语的女性更好地理解输卵管绝育的过程及后果。
我们将年龄在21至45岁之间讲西班牙语的女性随机分组,让她们分别阅读“标准”版或“低识字率”版的医疗补助SCF。我们使用产后输卵管绝育知识问卷中的项目评估绝育相关知识,将正确识别至少四个或更多知识项目作为主要结果,将参与者对SCF版本的偏好作为次要结果。
两组的总体绝育相关知识水平都较低,阅读标准SCF表格的女性中有33%(n = 100)、阅读低识字率表格的女性中有42%(n = 100)正确识别了四个或更多与知识相关的项目(p = 0.19)。关于具体项目,低识字率SCF组的女性比标准SCF组的女性更有可能理解绝育的永久性(69%对49%,p < 0.01)以及签署同意文件与接受绝育之间的时间要求(79%对59%,p < 0.01)。两组在认识到同样有效的非永久性避孕选择的可用性(71%对64%,p = 0.29)、从签署到过期的时间(33%对38%,p = 0.46)或绝育同意的非约束性(55%对62%,p = 0.32)方面相似。总体而言,两组中71%的参与者更喜欢低识字率版本。
在我们以教育程度低和健康素养技能不足为特征的患者群体中,与标准SCF相比,低识字率的SCF并未提高总体绝育相关知识。低识字率版本确实提高了对绝育永久性和手术时间要求的理解。
两种表格都没有向这个易受影响的讲西班牙语的人群传达足够的知识水平。因此,在整个知情同意过程中,对于同样有效的可逆避孕选择的可用性、手术相关风险以及绝育的永久性,仍然非常需要进行详细的教育。