DOES THE MESSAGE MATTER? ENHANCING PATIENT ADHERENCE THROUGH PERSUASIVE MESSAGES

To improve health and reduce costs, we need to encourage patients to make better healthcare decisions. Many informatics interventions are aimed at improving health outcomes by influencing patient behavior. However, we know little about how the content of a message in these interventions can influence a health-related decision. In this research we formulate a conceptual model to help explain and guide the design of “persuasive messages”, those which can change and influence patient behavior. We apply the conceptual model to design persuasive appointment reminder messages using humancentered design principles. Finally, we empirically test our hypotheses in a randomized controlled trial in order to determine the effectiveness of persuasive appointment reminders to reduce the number of missed appointments in a sample of 1016 subjects in a community health center. The results of the study confirm that reminder messages are effective in reducing missed appointment compared with no reminders (p=0.028). Further, reminder messages that incorporate heuristic cues such as authority, commitment, liking, and scarcity are more effective than reminder messages without such cues (p=0.006). However, the addition of systematic arguments or reasons for attending appointments have no effect on appointment adherence (p=0.646). The results of this research suggest that the content of reminder messages may be an important factor in helping to reduce missed appointments.

The Spanish translation, cultural adaptation and validation of the Powe Fatalism Inventory

Background/significance. The scarcity of reliable and valid Spanish language instruments for health related research has hindered research with the Hispanic population. Research suggests that fatalistic attitudes are related to poor cancer screening behaviors and may be one reason for low participation of Mexican-Americans in cancer screening. This problem is of major concern because Mexican-Americans constitute the largest Hispanic subgroup in the U.S.^ Purpose. The purposes of this study were: (1) To translate the Powe Fatalism Inventory, (PFI) into Spanish, and culturally adapt the instrument to the Mexican-American culture as found along the U.S.-Mexico border and (2) To test the equivalence between the Spanish translated, culturally adapted version of the PFI and the English version of the PFI to include clarity, content validity, reading level and reliability.^ Design. Descriptive, cross-sectional.^ Methods. The Spanish language translation used a translation model which incorporates a cultural adaptation process. The SPFI was administered to 175 bilingual participants residing in a midsize, U.S-Mexico border city. Data analysis included estimation of Cronbach's alpha, factor analysis, paired samples t-test comparison and multiple regression analysis using SPSS software, as well as measurement of content validity and reading level of the SPFI. ^ Findings. A reliability estimate using Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.81 for the SPFI compared to 0.80 for the PFI in this study. Factor Analysis extracted four factors which explained 59% of the variance. Paired t-test comparison revealed no statistically significant differences between the SPFI and PFI total or individual item scores. Content Validity Index was determined to be 1.0. Reading Level was assessed to be less than a 6th grade reading level. The correlation coefficient between the SPFI and PFI was 0.95.^ Conclusions. This study provided strong psychometric evidence that the Spanish translated, culturally adapted SPFI is an equivalent tool to the English version of the PFI in measuring cancer fatalism. This indicates that the two forms of the instrument can be used interchangeably in a single study to accommodate reading and speaking abilities of respondents. ^

Drinking water quality perception along the U.S.-Mexico border

Drinking water-related exposures within populations living in the United States-Mexico border region, particularly among Hispanics, is an area that is largely unknown. Specifically, perceptions that may affect water source selection is an issue that has not been fully addressed. This study evaluates drinking water quality perceptions in a mostly Hispanic community living along the United States-Mexico border, a community also facing water scarcity issues. Using a survey that was administered during two seasons (winter and summer), data were collected from a total of 608 participants, of which 303 were living in the United States and 305 in Mexico. A (random) convenience sampling technique was used to select households and those interviewed were over 18 years of age. Statistically significant differences were observed involving country of residence (p=0.002). Specifically, those living in Mexico reported a higher use of bottled water than those living in the United States. Perception factors, especially taste, were cited as main reasons for not selecting unfiltered tap water as a primary drinking water source. Understanding what influences drinking water source preference can aid in the development of risk communication strategies regarding water quality. ^