Use of electronic health (e-Health) technologies has increased in the past decade and inadequate e-Health literacy may lead to health-related social inequality. This is especially true for patients living with chronic diseases who are often involved in self-care. However, the measurement of e-Health literacy represents several challenges. Among available instruments, the e-Health Literacy Scale (eHEALS) is the only instrument with available psychometric properties.
Aim:
To identify studies measuring e-Health literacy in adults living with chronic disease and its relationship to health-related behaviors and other perceptions such as quality of life, self-efficacy, or specific disease biomarkers, and studies analyzing the impact of educational intervention on e-Health literacy.
Methods:
The authors searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases to identify studies published in English language until April 2022.
Results:
Seventeen studies involving 4,877 participants were included. A majority of the studies were cross-sectional with a lack of appropriate controls. Five of the included studies were experimental, involving 758 participants. All of them reported positive effects of educational interventions on the improvements in self-reported e-Health literacy skills. However, most studies were at risk of bias.
Conclusion:
Despite these limitations, the findings of this review indicate the positive relationship between e-Health literacy and various health care processes in adults with chronic diseases and highlights a need for prospective controlled studies. Promoting e-Health literacy might give better opportunities for the active involvement of people with chronic diseases in self-care and for the implementation of online interventions into existing system of care.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. About chronic diseases. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/about/index.htm (last accessed April17, 2022).
2.
LaggerG, PatakyZ, GolayA. Efficacy of therapeutic patient education in chronic diseases and obesity. Patient Educ Couns, 2010; 79:283–286.
3.
ShenH, van der KleijRMJJ, van der BoogPJM, et al.Electronic health self-management interventions for patients with chronic kidney disease: Systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence. J Med Internet Res, 2019; 21:e12384.
4.
HibbardJH, StockardJ, MahoneyER, et al.Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): Conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res, 2004; 39:1005–1026.
5.
GlazierRH, GreenME, WuFC, et al.Shifts in office and virtual primary care during the early COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada. CMAJ, 2021; 193:E200–E210.
6.
PhadkeNA, del CarmenMG, GoldsteinSA, et al.Trends in ambulatory electronic consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Gen Intern Med, 2020; 35:3117–3119.
7.
LeytonC, ZhangC, RikinS. Evaluation of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on electronic consultation use in primary care. Telemed J E Health, 2022; 28:66–72.
8.
BarbabellaF, MelchiorreMG, QuattriniS, et al.How can eHealth improve care for people with multimorbidity in Europe? European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. 2016. Policy Brief No. 25. Available at https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/337588/PB_25.pdf (last accessed April17, 2022).
9.
MiyazakiM, IgrasE, LiuL, OhyanagiT. Global health through eHealth/telehealth. EHealth and Remote Monitoring. 2012. Available at https://www.intechopen.com/books/ehealth-and-remote-monitoring/global-health-through-ehealth-telehealth (last accessed April17, 2022).
10.
ChesserA, BurkeA, ReyesJ, et al.Navigating the digital divide: A systematic review of eHealth literacy in underserved populations in the United States. Inform Health Soc Care, 2016; 41:1–19.
11.
WatkinsI, XieB. eHealth literacy interventions for older adults: A systematic review of the literature. J Med Internet Res, 2014; 16:e225.
12.
LimS, XueL, YenCC, et al.A study on Singaporean women's acceptance of using mobile phones to seek health information. Int J Med Inform, 2011; 80:e189–e202.
13.
DuplagaM.The acceptance of e-health solutions among patients with chronic respiratory conditions. Telemed J E Health, 2013; 19:683–691.
14.
NeterE, BraininE. eHealth literacy: Extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. J Med Internet Res, 2012; 14:e19.
15.
KimH, XieB. Health literacy in the eHealth era: A systematic review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns, 2017; 100:1073–1082.
16.
WongDK, CheungMK. Online health information seeking and eHealth literacy among patients attending a primary care clinic in Hong Kong: A cross-sectional survey. J Med Internet Res, 2019; 21:e10831.
17.
XuRH, ZhouL, WongEL, et al.The association between patients' eHealth literacy and satisfaction with shared decision-making and well-being: Multicenter cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res, 2021; 23:e26721.
18.
LatulippeK, HamelC, GirouxD. Social health inequalities and eHealth: A literature review with qualitative synthesis of theoretical and empirical studies. J Med Internet Res, 2017; 19:e136.
19.
NeterE, BraininE. Association between health literacy, eHealth literacy, and health outcomes among patients with long-term conditions: A systematic review. Eur Psychol, 2019; 24:68–81.
20.
BrørsG, NormanCD, NorekvålTM. Accelerated importance of eHealth literacy in the COVID-19 outbreak and beyond. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs, 2020; 19:458–461.
21.
KondilisB, AgrafiotisD, UitersE, et al.HLS-EU Consortium. Health literacy in Europe: Comparative results of the European health literacy survey (HLS-EU). Eur J Public Health, 2015; 25:1053–1058.
22.
NormanC.eHealth literacy 2.0: Problems and opportunities with an evolving concept. J Med Internet Res, 2011; 13:e125.
23.
FilabadiZ, EstebsariF, MilaniA, et al.Relationship between electronic health literacy, quality of life, and self-efficacy in Tehran, Iran: A community-based study. J Educ Health Promot, 2020; 9:175.
24.
RabenbauerLM, MevenkampN. Factors in the effectiveness of e-health interventions for chronic back pain: How self-efficacy mediates e-health literacy and healthy habits. Telemed J E Health, 2021; 27:184–192.
25.
YangSC, LuoYF, ChiangCH. The associations among individual factors, eHealth literacy, and health-promoting lifestyles among college students. J Med Internet Res, 2017; 19:e15.
26.
NormanCD, SkinnerHA. eHEALS: The eHealth Literacy Scale. J Med Internet Res, 2006; 8:e27.
27.
LeeJ, LeeE, ChaeD. eHealth literacy instruments: Systematic review of measurement properties. J Med Internet Res, 2021; 23:e30644.
28.
SeçkinG, YeattsD, HughesS, et al.Being an informed consumer of health information and assessment of electronic health literacy in a national sample of internet users: Validity and reliability of the e-HLS instrument. J Med Internet Res, 2016; 18:e161.
29.
van der VaartR, DrossaertC. Development of the digital health literacy instrument: Measuring a broad spectrum of health 1.0 and health 2.0 skills. J Med Internet Res, 2017; 19:e27.
30.
KarnoeA, FurstrandD, ChristensenKB, et al.Assessing competencies needed to engage with digital health services: Development of the eHealth literacy assessment toolkit. J Med Internet Res, 2018; 20:e178.
31.
KayserL, KarnoeA, FurstrandD, et al.A multidimensional tool based on the eHealth literacy framework: Development and initial validity testing of the eHealth literacy questionnaire (eHLQ). J Med Internet Res, 2018; 20:e36.
32.
PaigeSR, StellefsonM, KriegerJL, et al.Transactional eHealth literacy: Developing and testing a multi-dimensional instrument. J Health Commun, 2019; 24:737–748.
33.
MilneRA, PutsMT, PapadakosJ, et al.Predictors of high eHealth literacy in primary lung cancer survivors. J Cancer Educ, 2015; 30:685–692.
34.
BlackstockOJ, CunninghamCO, HaughtonLJ, et al.Higher eHealth literacy is associated with HIV risk behaviors among HIV-infected women who use the internet. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care, 2016; 27:102–108.
35.
HanHR, HongH, StarbirdLE, et al.eHealth literacy in people living with HIV: Systematic review. JMIR Public Health Surveill, 2018; 4:e64.
36.
SchulzKF, AltmanDG, MoherD. CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med, 2010; 152:726–732.
37.
ZwarensteinM, TreweekS, GagnierJJ, et al.CONSORT Group; Pragmatic Trials in Healthcare (Practihc) Group. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: An extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ, 2008; 337:a2390.
38.
von ElmE, AltmanDG, EggerM, et al.STROBE initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med, 2007; 147:573–577. Erratum in: Ann Intern Med 2008;147:168.
39.
VandenbrouckeJP, von ElmE, AltmanDG, et al.STROBE initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med, 2007; 147:W163–W194.
40.
MunnZ, PetersMDJ, SternC, et al.Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2018; 18:143.
41.
TriccoAC, LillieE, ZarinW, et al.PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med, 2018; 169:467–473.
42.
NahmES, ZhuS, BellantoniM, et al.The effects of a theory-based patient portal e-learning program for older adults with chronic illnesses. Telemed J E Health, 2019; 25:940–951.
43.
LylesCR, TieuL, SarkarU, et al.A randomized trial to train vulnerable primary care patients to use a patient portal. J Am Board Fam Med, 2019; 32:248–258.
44.
CarrollJK, TobinJN, LuqueA, et al.“Get Ready and Empowered About Treatment” (GREAT) study: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of activation in persons living with HIV. J Gen Intern Med, 2019; 34:1782–1789.
45.
RobinsonC, GrahamJ. Perceived Internet health literacy of HIV-positive people through the provision of a computer and Internet health education intervention. Health Info Libr J, 2010; 27:295–303.
46.
HooglandAI, MansfieldJ, LafranchiseEA, et al.eHealth literacy in older adults with cancer. J Geriatr Oncol, 2020; 11:1020–1022.
47.
WoodsSP, SullivanKL. Lower neurocognitive functioning disrupts the effective use of internet-based health resources in HIV disease: The mediating effects of general health literacy capacity. AIDS Behav, 2019; 23:676–683.
48.
StellefsonM, PaigeSR, AlberJM, et al.Association between health literacy, electronic health literacy, disease-specific knowledge, and health-related quality of life among adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res, 2019; 21:e12165.
49.
MaroneyK, CurtisLM, OpsasnickL, et al.eHealth literacy and web-based patient portal usage among kidney and liver transplant recipients. Clin Transplant, 2021; 35:e14184.
50.
LeeK, HotiK, HughesJD, et al.Consumer use of “Dr Google”: A survey on health information-seeking behaviors and navigational needs. J Med Internet Res, 2015; 17:e288.
51.
ShiferawKB, TilahunBC, EndehabtuBF, et al.E-health literacy and associated factors among chronic patients in a low-income country: A cross-sectional survey. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2020; 20:181.
52.
MelholtC, JoenssonK, SpindlerH, et al.Cardiac patients' experiences with a telerehabilitation web portal: Implications for eHealth literacy. Patient Educ Couns, 2018; 101:854–861.
53.
ErnstingC, StühmannLM, DombrowskiSU, et al.Associations of health app use and perceived effectiveness in people with cardiovascular diseases and diabetes: Population-based survey. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 2019; 7:e12179.
54.
AthanasopoulouC, VälimäkiM, KoutraK, et al.Internet use, eHealth literacy and attitudes toward computer/internet among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: A cross-sectional study in two distant European regions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2017; 17:136.
55.
LinCY, GanjiM, GriffithsMD, et al.Mediated effects of insomnia, psychological distress and medication adherence in the association of eHealth literacy and cardiac events among Iranian older patients with heart failure: A longitudinal study. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs, 2020; 19:155–164.
56.
KimKA, KimYJ, ChoiM. Association of electronic health literacy with health-promoting behaviors in patients with type 2 diabetes: A cross-sectional study. Comput Inform Nurs, 2018; 36:438–447.
57.
ChungS, ParkBK, NahmES. The Korean eHealth Literacy Scale (K-eHEALS): Reliability and validity testing in younger adults recruited online. J Med Internet Res, 2018; 20:e138.
58.
MadrigalL, EscofferyC. Electronic health behaviors among US adults with chronic disease: Cross-sectional survey. J Med Internet Res, 2019; 21:e11240.
59.
WongAKC, BayuoJ, WongFKY. Investigating predictors of self-care behavior among homebound older adults: The role of self-efficacy, eHealth literacy, and perceived social support. J Nurs Scholarsh, 2022; 54:278–285.
60.
ZrubkaZ, BritoFernandes Ó, BajiP, et al.Exploring eHealth literacy and patient-reported experiences with outpatient care in the Hungarian general adult population: Cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res, 2020; 22:e19013.
61.
NejatiB, LinCC, AaronsonNK, et al.Determinants of satisfactory patient communication and shared decision making in patients with multiple myeloma. Psychooncology, 2019; 28:1490–1497.
62.
LuX, ZhangR. Association between eHealth literacy in online health communities and patient adherence: Cross-sectional questionnaire study. J Med Internet Res, 2021; 23:e14908.
63.
KhasawnehRA, NusairMB, ArabyatRM, et al.The association between e-Health literacy and willingness to deprescribe among patients with chronic diseases: A cross-sectional study from Jordan. Telemed J E Health, 2022; 28:1001–1008.
64.
PourrazaviS, KouzekananiK, Bazargan-HejaziS, et al.Theory-based E-health literacy interventions in older adults: A systematic review. Arch Public Health, 2020; 78:72.
65.
ChengC, BeauchampA, ElsworthG, et al.Applying the electronic health literacy lens: Systematic review of electronic health interventions targeted at socially disadvantaged groups. J Med Internet Res, 2020; 22:e18476.
66.
HibbardJH, MahoneyER, StockardJ, et al.Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health Serv Res, 2005; 40:1918–1930.
67.
LermanCE, BrodyDS, CaputoGC, et al.Patients' perceived involvement in care scale: Relationship to attitudes about illness and medical care. J Gen Intern Med, 1990; 5:29–33.
68.
CampbellC, LockyerJ, LaidlawT, et al.Assessment of a matched-pair instrument to examine doctor–patient communication skills in practising doctors. Med Educ, 2007; 41:123–129.
69.
O'ConnorAM.Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Making, 1995; 15:25–30.
70.
JohnsonMO, NeilandsTB, DilworthSE, et al.The role of self-efficacy in HIV treatment adherence: Validation of the HIV Treatment Adherence Self-Efficacy Scale (HIV-ASES). J Behav Med, 2007; 30:359–370.
71.
GandekB, WareJE, AaronsonNK, et al.Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol, 1998; 51:1171–1178.
72.
NokesKM, VerkuilenJ, HickeyDE, et al.Developing a personal health record self-efficacy tool. Appl Nurs Res, 2013; 26:32–39.
73.
FlockeSA.Measuring attributes of primary care: Development of a new instrument. J Fam Pract, 1997; 45:64–74.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
