Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Hosp Med. 2018 Feb 12;13(3):145–151. doi: 10.12788/jhm.2932

Numeracy, Health Literacy, Cognition and 30-day Readmissions among Patients with Heart Failure: The Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS)

Madeline R Sterling 1, Monika M Safford 1,2, Kathryn Goggins 3,4,5, Sam K Nwosu 6, Jonathan S Schildcrout 6, Kenneth A Wallston 7, Amanda S Mixon 3,8,9, Russell L Rothman 3,8, Sunil Kripalani 3,4,5,8
PMCID: PMC5836748  NIHMSID: NIHMS945280  PMID: 29455228

Abstract

Background

Numeracy, health literacy, and cognition are important for chronic disease management. Prior studies have found them to be associated with poorer self-care and worse clinical outcomes, but limited data exists in the context of heart failure (HF), a condition which requires patients to monitor their weight, fluid intake and dietary salt, especially in the post-hospitalization period.

Objective

To examine the relationship between numeracy, health literacy, and cognition with 30-day readmissions among patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF).

Design/Setting/Patients

The Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS) is a prospective longitudinal study of adults hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes and/or ADHF. We studied 883 adults hospitalized with ADHF.

Measurements

During their hospitalization, a baseline interview was performed in which demographic characteristics, numeracy, health literacy, and cognition were assessed. Through chart review, clinical characteristics were determined. The outcome of interest was 30-day readmission to any acute care hospital. To examine the association between numeracy, health literacy, cognition and 30-day readmissions, multivariable Poisson (log-linear) regression was used.

Results

Of the 883 patients admitted for ADHF, 23.8% (n=210) were readmitted within 30 days; 33.9% of the study population had inadequate numeracy skills, 24.6% had inadequate/marginal literacy skills, and 53% had any cognitive impairment. Numeracy and cognition were not associated with 30-day readmissions. While (objective) health literacy was associated with 30-day readmissions in unadjusted analysis, it was not in adjusted analyses.

Conclusions

Numeracy, health literacy, and cognition were not associated with 30-day readmission among this sample of patients hospitalized with ADHF.

Keywords: Heart Failure, Heart Failure Readmission, Health Services

Introduction

Most studies to identify risk factors for readmission among patients with heart failure (HF) have focused on demographic and clinical characteristics.1,2 Although easy to extract from administrative databases, this approach fails to capture the complex psychosocial and cognitive factors which influence the ability of HF patients to manage their disease in the post-discharge period, as depicted in the framework by Meyers et al (2014).3 To date, studies have found low health literacy, decreased social support, and cognitive impairment to be associated with health behaviors and outcomes among HF patients, including decreased self-care4, low HF-specific knowledge5, medication non-adherence6, hospitalizations7 and mortality.810 Less, however, is known about the effect of numeracy on HF outcomes, such as 30-day readmission.

Numeracy, or quantitative literacy, refers to the ability to access, understand, and apply numerical data to health-related decisions.11 It is estimated that 110 million people in the US have limited numeracy skills.12 Low numeracy is a risk factor for poor glycemic control among patients with diabetes13, medication adherence in HIV/AIDS,14 and worse blood pressure control in hypertensives15. Much like these conditions, HF requires that patients understand, use, and act on numerical information. Maintaining a low salt diet, monitoring weight, adjusting diuretic doses, and measuring blood pressure are tasks that HF patients are asked to perform on a daily or near-daily basis. These tasks are particularly important in the post-hospitalization period and could be complicated by medication changes, which might create additional challenges for patients with inadequate numeracy. Additionally, cognitive impairment, which is a highly prevalent comorbid condition among adults with HF16,17, might impose additional barriers for those with inadequate numeracy and who do not have adequate social support. However, to date, numeracy in the context of HF, has not been well described.

Herein, we examined the effects of numeracy, alongside health literacy, and cognition, on 30-day readmission risk among patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF).

Methods

Study Design

The Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS) is a prospective observational study of patients admitted with cardiovascular disease to Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), an academic tertiary care hospital. VICS was designed to investigate the impact of social determinants of health on post-discharge health outcomes. A detailed description of the study rationale, design and methods is described elsewhere.3

Briefly, participants completed a baseline interview while hospitalized, and follow-up phone calls were conducted within 1 week of discharge, at 30 days, and at 90 days. At 30 and 90-days post-discharge, healthcare utilization was ascertained by review of medical records and patient report. Clinical data about the index hospitalization were also abstracted. The Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board approved the study.

Study population

Patients hospitalized from 2011 to 2015 with a likely diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome and/or ADHF, as determined by a physician’s review of the medical record, were identified as potentially eligible. Research assistants assessed these patients for the presence of exclusion criteria: less than 18 years of age, non-English speaking, unstable psychiatric illness, a low likelihood of follow-up (e.g., no reliable telephone number), on hospice or otherwise too ill to complete an interview. Additionally, those with severe cognitive impairment, as assessed from the medical record (such as seeing a note describing dementia) and those with delirium, as assessed by the brief confusion assessment method (bCAM), were excluded from enrollment in the study.18,19 Those who died before discharge or during the 30-day follow-up period were excluded. For this analysis, we restricted our sample to only include participants who were hospitalized for ADHF.

Outcome Measure: 30-day readmission

The main outcome was all-cause readmission to any hospital within 30 days of discharge, as determined by patient interview, review of electronic medical records from VUMC, and review of outside hospital records.

Main Exposures: Numeracy, Health Literacy and Cognitive Impairment

Numeracy was assessed with a 3-item version of the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS-3), which quantifies the patients perceived quantitative abilities.20 Other authors have shown that the SNS-3 has a correlation coefficient of 0.88 with the full-length SNS-8 and a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.78.2022 The SNS-3 is reported as the mean on a scale from 1 to 6, with higher scores reflecting higher numeracy.

Subjective health literacy was assessed using the 3-item Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS).23 Scores range from 3 to 15, with higher scores reflecting higher literacy. Objective health literacy was assessed with the short form of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (sTOFHLA).24,25 Scores may be categorized as inadequate (0–16), marginal (17–22), or adequate (23–36).

We assessed cognition using the 10-item SPMSQ.26 The SPMSQ, which describes a person’s capacity for memory, structured thought and orientation, has been validated and has demonstrated good reliability and validity.27 Scores of 0 were considered to reflect intact cognition and scores of 1 or more were considered to reflect any cognitive impairment, a scoring approach employed by other authors.28 We used this approach, rather than the traditional scoring system developed by Pfeiffer et al (1975), since it would be the most sensitive to detect any cognitive impairment in the VICS cohort, which excluded those with severe cognition impairment, dementia, and delirium.

Covariates

During the hospitalization, participants completed an in-person interviewer-administered baseline assessment comprised of demographic information including: age, self-reported race (white and non-white), educational attainment, and home status (married, not married and living with someone, not married and living alone), and household income.

Clinical and diagnostic characteristics abstracted from the medical record included a medical history of HF, HF-subtype (classified by left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF]), coronary artery disease (CAD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes mellitus (DM), and comorbidity burden as summarized by the van Walraven-Elixhauser score.29,30 Depressive symptoms were assessed during the two weeks prior to the hospitalization using the first eight items of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8).31 Scores ranged from 0 to 24, with higher scores reflecting more severe depressive symptoms. Laboratory values included estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], hemoglobin (g/dl), sodium (mg/L), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) (pg/ml) from the last laboratory draw before discharge. Smoking status was also assessed (current and former/non-smokers).

Hospitalization characteristics included length of stay (LOS) in days; number of prior admissions in the last year; and transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the index admission.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics. The Kruskal-Wallis test and the Pearson Chi-square test were used to determine the association between patient characteristics and levels of numeracy, literacy, and cognition separately. The unadjusted relationship between patient characteristics and 30-day readmission was assessed using Wilcoxon rank sums tests for continuous variables and Pearson Chi-square tests for categorical variables. In addition, a correlation matrix was performed to assess the correlations between numeracy, health literacy and cognition (Supplemental Figure 1).

To examine the association between numeracy, health literacy, and cognition and 30-day readmissions, a series of multivariable Poisson (log-linear) regression models were fit.32 Like other studies, numeracy, health literacy and cognition were examined as categorical and continuous measures in models.33 Each model was modified with a sandwich estimator for robust standard errors. Log-linear models were chosen over logistic regression models for ease of interpretation since (exponentiated) parameters correspond to risk ratios as opposed to odds ratios. Further, the fitting challenges associated with log-linear models when predicted probabilities are near 0 or 1 were not present in these analyses. Redundancy analyses were conducted to ensure that independent variables were not highly correlated with a linear combination of the other independent variables. To avoid case-wise deletion of records with missing covariates we employed multiple imputation with 10 imputation samples using predictive mean matching.34,35 All analyses were conducted in R version 3.1.2.36

Results

Overall, 883 patients were included in this analysis (Supplementary Figure 2). Of the 883 participants, 46% were female and 76% were white (Table 1). Their median age was 60 years (interdecile range [IDR] 39–78) and the median educational attainment was 13.5 years (IDR 11–18).

Table 1.

Characteristics of Study Participants Hospitalized for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure (ADHF) by Objective Numeracy, Objective Health Literacy and Cognitive Impairment in the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS)

Patient Characteristics N Overall Numeracy (n = 881) Health Literacy (n = 825) Cognition (n =878)
Inadequate Adequate P-value Inadequate/Marginal Adequate P-value Any Impairment Intact Cognition P-value
n = 299 n = 582 n = 203 n = 622 n = 462 n = 416
Socio-Demographic Characteristics
Age, median(IDR) 883 60 (39, 78) 63 (43, 81) 60 (38, 77) <0.001 63 (43, 81) 60 (38, 77) <0.001 61 (42, 80) 60 (38, 76) 0.04
Female, n(%) 883 410 (46%) 104 (45%) 304 (47%) 0.69 104 (45%) 304 (47%) 0.69 239 (52%) 168 (40%) <0.001
Race: Non-White, n(%) 882 212 (24%) 44 (19%) 166 (26%) 0.05 44 (19%) 166 (26%) 0.05 126 (27%) 84 (20%) 0.01
Education, median(IDR) 882 13 (11, 18) 12 ( 9, 14) 14 (12, 18) <0.001 12 ( 9, 14) 14 (12, 18) <0.001 12 (10, 16) 14 (12, 18) <0.001
Income, median(IDR) 839 5 (2, 8) 4 (2, 7) 5 (2, 8) <0.001 4 (2, 7) 5 (2, 8) <0.001 5 (1, 7) 6 (2, 9) <0.001
Home Status, n(%) 881 0.18 0.18 0.08
 Married 475 (54%) 136 (59%) 339 (52%) 136 (59%) 339 (52%) 233 (51%) 241 (58%)
 Not Married, Living with someone 209 (24%) 50 (22%) 157 (24%) 50 (22%) 157 (24%) 120 (26%) 88 (21%)
 Not Married, Living Alone 197 (22%) 44 (19%) 153 (24%) 44 (19%) 153 (24%) 108 (23%) 87 (21%)
Clinical and Diagnostic Characteristics
History of Heart Failure, n(%) 864 688 (80%) 182 (81%) 503 (79%) 0.57 182 (81%) 503 (79%) 0.57 363 (80%) 320 (79%) 0.73
History of COPD, n(%) 883 242 (27%) 78 (34%) 164 (25%) 0.01 78 (34%) 164 (25%) 0.011 144 (31%) 97 (23%) 0.01
History of CAD, n(%) 863 375 (43%) 113 (50%) 262 (41%) 0.02 113 (50%) 262 (41%) 0.02 202 (44%) 171 (42%) 0.52
History of Diabetes, n(%) 864 377 (44%) 114 (51%) 261 (41%) 0.01 114 (51%) 261 (41%) 0.01 210 (46%) 163 (40%) 0.08
Depression, median(IDR) 865 9 ( 3, 17) 10 ( 4, 19) 8 ( 3, 16) <0.001 10 ( 4, 19) 8 ( 3, 16) <0.001 9 ( 3, 17) 8 ( 3, 16) 0.43
Elixhauser Score, median(IDR) 867 20 (10, 34) 22 (12, 34) 21 (10, 35) 0.11 21 (11, 33) 20 ( 9, 34) 0.34 22 (11, 34) 20 (10, 35) 0.09
Ejection Fraction (%), median (IDR) 868 40 (15, 60) 45 (15, 60) 38 (15, 60) 0.05 45 (15, 60) 38 (15, 60) 0.05 42 (15, 60) 35 (15, 60) 0.08
EGFR, median(IQR) 865 57 (25, 97) 49 (23, 92) 60 (26, 97) <0.001 49 (23, 92) 60 (26, 97) 0.001 57 (26, 97) 58 (25, 97) 0.76
Hemoglobin(g/dL), median(IDR) 862 12 ( 9, 15) 11 ( 9, 15) 12 ( 9, 15) 0.07 11 ( 9, 15) 12 ( 9, 15) 0.07 11 ( 9, 15) 12 ( 9, 15) 0.01
Sodium(mg/L), median(IDR) 865 137 (132, 141) 137 (132, 142) 137 (132, 141) 0.81 137 (132, 142) 137 (132, 141) 0.81 137 (133, 141) 137 (132, 141) 0.6
BNP(pg/mL), median(IDR) 791 620 ( 110, 2374) 669 ( 107, 2502) 611 ( 116, 2242) 0.59 669 ( 107, 2502) 611 ( 116, 2242) 0.59 616 ( 114, 2505) 620 ( 106, 2219) 0.48
Current smoker, n(%) 858 110 (13%) 17% (80/290) 11% (60/568) <0.001 38 (17%) 72 (11%) 0.03 43 (15%) 67 (11%) 0.06
Hospitalization Characteristics
Length of Stay (days), median(IDR) 883 4 ( 2, 13) 5 ( 2, 11) 4 ( 2, 13) 0.31 5 ( 2, 11) 4 ( 2, 13) 0.31 5 ( 2, 13) 4 ( 2, 12) 0.16
Transfer to ICU, n(%) 864 198 (23%) 47 (21%) 150 (24%) 0.41 47 (21%) 150 (24%) 0.41 106 (23%) 92 (23%) 0.83
Number Admissions Past 12 Months 877 1 (0, 5) 2 (0, 5) 1 (0, 5) 0.06 2 (0, 5) 1 (0, 5) 0.06 2 (0, 5) 1 (0, 5) 0.23

Continuous variables are summarized with the median and Inter Decile Range: median (IDR); Categorical variables are summarized with the n and percentage: n (%); N is the number of non–missing values; Income was considered a continuous variable but the numbers represent ordinal categories: 1=<$10,000, 2=$10,000–$14,999, 3=$15,000–$19,999, 4=$20,000–$24,999, 5=$25,000–$34,999, 6=$35,000–$49,999, 7=$50,000–$74,999, 8=$75,000–$99,999, 9=$100,000; Educational attainment ranges from 1 year to 25 years; For associations with categorical variables, the Pearson Chi-Square test was used; For associations with continuous variables, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used.

Characteristics of the study sample by levels of numeracy, objective health literacy, and cognition are shown in Table 1. A total of 33.9% had inadequate health numeracy (SNS scores 1–3 on a scale of 1–6) with an overall mean numeracy score of 4.3 (SD ± 1.3). Patients with inadequate numeracy were more likely to be women, non-white and have lower education and income. Overall, 24.6% of the study population had inadequate/marginal objective health literacy, which is similar to the 26.1% with inadequate health literacy by the subjective literacy scale (BHLS scores 3–9 on a scale of 3–15) (Supplemental Table 1). Patients with inadequate objective health literacy were more likely to be older, non-white, have less education and income, and more comorbidities compared to those with marginal/adequate health literacy. Overall, 53% of participants had any cognitive impairment (SPMSQ score = 1 or greater). They were more likely to be older, female, have less education and income, a greater number of comorbidities and a higher severity of HF during the index admission, compared to those with intact cognition.

A total of 23.8% (n=210) of patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge (Table 2). There was no statistically significant difference in readmission by numeracy level (p = 0.66). Readmitted patients were more likely to have lower objective health literacy compared to those who were not readmitted (27.1 vs 28.3, p=0.04). A higher percentage of readmitted patients were cognitively impaired (57%) compared to those not readmitted (51%), however this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.11). Readmitted patients did not differ from non-readmitted patients by demographic factors (Supplemental Table 2). They were, however, more likely to have a history of HF, COPD, diabetes, CKD, higher Elixhauser scores, lower EGFR and lower sodium prior to discharge, and a greater number of prior readmissions in the last 12 months compared to those who were not readmitted (all p < 0.05).

Table 2.

30-day Readmissions by Numeracy, Health Literacy and Cognitive Impairment Among Participants Hospitalized for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure (ADHF) in the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS)

N Overall No Readmission Readmission P-value
N=883 N=673 N=210
Numeracy
Numeracy Category 881 0.75
 Inadequate 299 (34%) 230 (34%) 69 (33%)
 Adequate 582 (66%) 442 (66%) 140 (67%)
Numeracy Score 881 4 (2, 6) 4 (2, 6) 5 (2, 6) 0.66
Health Literacy
Subjective Literacy Category (BHLS) 880 0.67
 Inadequate 230 (26%) 178 (26%) 52 (25%)
 Adequate 650 (74%) 494 (74%) 156 (75%)
BHLS 881 12 ( 7, 15) 12 ( 7, 15) 12 ( 6, 15) 0.52
Objective Literacy Category (s-TOFHLA) 825 0.11
 Inadequate 127 (15%) 89 (14%) 38 (19%)
 Marginal 76 (9%) 63 (10%) 13 (7%)
 Adequate 622 (75%) 475 (76%) 147 (74%)
 sTOFHLA 825 32 (14, 36) 33 (15, 36) 31 (12, 35) 0.04
Cognition
Cognition Impairment Category 878 0.11
 Cognitive Impairment 462 (53%) 342 (51%) 120 (57%)
 Intact Cognition 416 (47%) 327 (49%) 89 (43%)
Cognitive Impairment Score 878 0 (0, 1) 0 (0, 1) 0 (0, 2) 0.09

N is the number of non–missing values

For associations with categorical variables, the Pearson Chi-Square test was used

For associations with continuous variables, the Wilcoxon test was used

In unadjusted and adjusted analyses, no statistically significant associations were seen between numeracy and 30-day readmission (Table 3). Additionally, in the adjusted analyses, there was no statistically significant association between objective health literacy or cognition and 30-day readmission. (Supplemental Table 3). In a fully adjusted model, a history of diabetes was associated with a 30% greater risk of 30-day readmission, compared to patients without a history of diabetes (RR=1.30 p=0.04) (Supplemental Table 3). Per 13-point increase in the Elixhauser score, the risk of readmission within 30-days increased by approximately 21% (RR=1.21 and p=0.02). Additionally, having 3 prior hospital admissions in the previous 12 months was associated with a 30% higher risk of readmission than having 2 or fewer prior hospital admissions (RR=1.3 and p-value<0.001).

Table 3.

The Effect of Numeracy on 30-Day Readmissions among those hospitalized for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure (ADHF) in the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS)

Numeracy Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5
RR 95% CI P-Value RR 95% CI P-Value RR 95% CI P-Value RR 95% CI P-Value RR 95% CI P-Value
Numeracy Score (per 2 point change) 1.02 0.86 – 1.23 0.79 1.09 0.89 – 1.33 0.39 1.04 0.83 – 1.29 0.75 1.06 0.85 – 1.33 0.57 1.04 0.83 – 1.30 0.72

Poisson Model Estimates

Model 1 adjusts for numeracy alone

Model 2 adjusts for the Model 1 variable and adjusts for health literacy and cognitive impairment variables

Model 3 adjusts for the Model 2 variables and demographics

Model 4 adjusts for Model 3 variables and clinical and diagnostic characteristics

Model 5 adjusts for Model 4 variables and hospitalization characteristics

Discussion

This is the first study to examine the effect of numeracy alongside literacy and cognition on 30-day readmission risk among patients hospitalized with ADHF. Overall, we found that 33.9% of participants had inadequate numeracy skills and 24.6% had inadequate or marginal health literacy. In unadjusted and adjusted models, numeracy was not associated with 30-day readmission. Although (objective) low health literacy was associated with 30-day readmission in unadjusted models, it was not in adjusted models. Additionally, while 53% of participants had any cognitive impairment, readmission did not differ significantly by this factor. Taken together, these findings suggest that other factors may be greater determinants of 30-day readmissions among patients hospitalized for ADHF.

Only one other study has examined the effect of numeracy on readmission risk among patients hospitalized for HF. In this multi-center prospective study, McNaughton et al found low numeracy to be associated with higher odds of recidivism to the ED or hospital within 30 days.37 Our findings may differ from theirs for a few reasons. First, their study had a significantly higher percentage of individuals with low numeracy (55%) compared to ours (33.9%). This may be because they did not exclude individuals with severe cognitive impairment and their patient population was of lower socioeconomic status than ours. Low SES is associated with higher 30 day readmissions among HF patients1,10 and throughout the literature and low numeracy is associated with low SES in other diseases.13,38,39 Finally, they studied recidivism, which was defined as any unplanned return to the emergency department or hospital within 30 days of the index emergency department visit for acute heart failure. We only focused on 30-day readmissions, which also may explain why our results differed.

We found that health literacy was not associated with 30-day readmissions, which is consistent with the literature. Although an association between health literacy and mortality exists among adults with HF, several studies have not found an association between health literacy and 30 and 90-day readmission among adults hospitalized for HF.8,9,40 Although we found an association between objective health literacy and 30-day readmission in unadjusted analyses, we did not find one in the multivariable model. This, along with our numeracy finding, suggests that numeracy and literacy may not be driving 30-day readmission risk among patients hospitalized with ADHF.

We examined cognitive impairment alongside numeracy and literacy since it is a prevalent condition among HF patients and because it is associated with adverse outcomes among patients with HF, including readmission.41,42 Studies have shown that HF preferentially affects certain cognitive domains43, some of which are vital to HF self-care activities. We found that 53% of patients had any cognitive impairment, which is consistent with the literature of adults hospitalized for ADHF.44,45 Cognitive impairment was not, however, associated with 30-day readmissions. There may be a few reasons for this. First, we measured cognitive impairment with the SPMSQ, which, although widely used and well-validated, does not assess executive function, the domain most commonly affected in HF patients with cognitive impairment.46 Second, patients with severe cognitive impairment and those with delirium were excluded from this study, which may have limited our ability to detect differences in readmission by this factor.

Similar to prior studies, we found that a history of DM and more hospitalizations in the prior year were independently associated with 30-day readmissions, in fully adjusted models. Like other studies, in adjusted models, we found that LVEF and a history of HF were not independently associated with 30-day readmission.4749 This, however, is not surprising since recent studies have shown that while HF patients are at risk for multiple hospitalizations, early readmission after a hospitalization for ADHF specifically, is often due to reasons unrelated to HF, or non-cardiovascular cause in general.50,51

Although a negative study, several important themes emerged. First, while we were able to assess numeracy, health literacy, and cognition, none of these measures were HF-specific. It is possible that we did not see an effect on readmission because our instruments failed to assess domains specific to HF such as monitoring weight changes, following a low salt diet, and interpreting blood pressure. Currently, however, no HF-specific objective numeracy measure exists. With respect to health literacy, only one HF-specific measure exists,52 although it was only recently developed and validated. Second, while numeracy, may not be a driving influence of all cause 30-day readmissions, it may be associated with other health behaviors and quality metrics that we did not examine here, such as self-care, medication adherence and HF-specific readmissions. Third, it is likely that the progression of HF itself, as well as the clinical management of patients following discharge, contribute significantly to 30-day readmissions. Increased attention to pre-discharge processes for HF patients occurred at VUMC during the study period; close follow-up and evidence-directed therapies may have mitigated some of the expected associations. Finally, we were not able to assess numeracy of participants’ primary caregivers, who may help patients at home, especially post-discharge. While a number of studies have examined the role of family caregivers in the management of HF,53,54 none have examined numeracy levels of caregivers in the context of HF, and this may be worth doing in future studies.

Overall, our study has several strengths. The size of the cohort is large and there were high response rates during the follow up period. Unlike other HF readmission studies, VICS accounts for readmissions to outside hospitals. Approximately 35% of all hospitalizations in VICS are to outside facilities. Thus, the ascertainment of readmissions to hospitals other than Vanderbilt is more comprehensive than if readmissions to VUH were only considered. We were able to include a number of clinical comorbidities, laboratory and diagnostic tests from the index admission, and hospitalization characteristics in our analyses. Finally, we performed additional analyses to investigate the correlation between numeracy, literacy, and cognition; ultimately, we found that the majority of these correlations were weak, which supports our ability to study them simultaneously among VICS participants.

Nonetheless, we note some limitations. Although we captured readmissions to outside hospitals, the study took place at a single referral center in Tennessee. While patients were diverse in age and comorbidities, they were mostly white and of higher socioeconomic status. Finally, we used home status as a proxy for social support, which may underestimate the support that home care workers provide.

In conclusion, in this prospective longitudinal study of adults hospitalized with ADHF, inadequate numeracy was present in more than a third of patients and low health literacy was present in roughly a quarter of patients. Neither numeracy or health literacy, however, were associated with 30-day readmissions in adjusted analyses. Any cognitive impairment, although present in roughly one half of patients, was not associated with 30-day readmission either. Our findings suggest that other influences may play a more dominant role in determining 30-day readmission rates in patients hospitalized for ADHF than inadequate numeracy, low health literacy, or cognitive impairment as assessed here.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental Tables

Acknowledgments

Funders:

This research was supported by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (R01 HL109388), and in part by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1 TR000445-06). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors’ funding sources did not participate in the planning, collection, analysis or interpretation of data or in the decision to submit for publication.

Dr. Sterling is supported by T32HS000066 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Dr. Mixon has a VA Health Services Research and Development Service Career Development Award at the Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Department of Veterans Affairs (CDA 12-168).

Footnotes

Contributors:

None

Prior presentations:

This material was presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting on April 20, 2017 in Washington, DC.

Conflict of Interest:

Dr. Kripalani reports personal fees from Verustat, personal fees from SAI Interactive, and equity from Bioscape Digital, all outside of the submitted work. Dr. Rothman reports personal fees from edlogics, outside of the submitted work. All of the other authors have nothing to disclose.

References

  • 1.Ross JS, Mulvey GK, Stauffer B, et al. Statistical models and patient predictors of readmission for heart failure: a systematic review. Archives of internal medicine. 2008;168(13):1371–1386. doi: 10.1001/archinte.168.13.1371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Zaya M, Phan A, Schwarz ER. Predictors of re-hospitalization in patients with chronic heart failure. World journal of cardiology. 2012;4(2):23–30. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v4.i2.23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Meyers AG, Salanitro A, Wallston KA, et al. Determinants of health after hospital discharge: rationale and design of the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS) BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Harkness K, Heckman GA, Akhtar-Danesh N, Demers C, Gunn E, McKelvie RS. Cognitive function and self-care management in older patients with heart failure. European journal of cardiovascular nursing : journal of the Working Group on Cardiovascular Nursing of the European Society of Cardiology. 2014;13(3):277–284. doi: 10.1177/1474515113492603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Dennison CR, McEntee ML, Samuel L, et al. Adequate health literacy is associated with higher heart failure knowledge and self-care confidence in hospitalized patients. The Journal of cardiovascular nursing. 2011;26(5):359–367. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0b013e3181f16f88. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Mixon AS, Myers AP, Leak CL, et al. Characteristics associated with post-discharge medication errors. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014;89(8):1042–1051. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.04.023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wu JR, Holmes GM, DeWalt DA, et al. Low literacy is associated with increased risk of hospitalization and death among individuals with heart failure. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(9):1174–1180. doi: 10.1007/s11606-013-2394-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.McNaughton CD, Cawthon C, Kripalani S, Liu D, Storrow AB, Roumie CL. Health literacy and mortality: a cohort study of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2015;4(5) doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.001799. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Moser DK, Robinson S, Biddle MJ, et al. Health Literacy Predicts Morbidity and Mortality in Rural Patients With Heart Failure. Journal of cardiac failure. 2015;21(8):612–618. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2015.04.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Calvillo-King L, Arnold D, Eubank KJ, et al. Impact of social factors on risk of readmission or mortality in pneumonia and heart failure: systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(2):269–282. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2235-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Rothman RL, Montori VM, Cherrington A, Pignone MP. Perspective: the role of numeracy in health care. Journal of health communication. 2008;13(6):583–595. doi: 10.1080/10810730802281791. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kutner M, Greenberg E, Baer J. National Center for Education Statistics. 2006. A First Look at the Literacy of America’s Adults in the 21st Century. NCES 2006–470. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Cavanaugh K, Huizinga MM, Wallston KA, et al. Association of numeracy and diabetes control. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(10):737–746. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-148-10-200805200-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ciampa PJ, Vaz LM, Blevins M, et al. The association among literacy, numeracy, HIV knowledge and health-seeking behavior: a population-based survey of women in rural Mozambique. PloS one. 2012;7(6):e39391. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0039391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Rao VN, Sheridan SL, Tuttle LA, et al. The effect of numeracy level on completeness of home blood pressure monitoring. Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn) 2015;17(1):39–45. doi: 10.1111/jch.12443. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Hanon O, Contre C, De Groote P, et al. High prevalence of cognitive disorders in Heart Failure patients: Results of the EFICARE survey. Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements. 2011;3(1):26. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Vogels RL, Scheltens P, Schroeder-Tanka JM, Weinstein HC. Cognitive impairment in heart failure: a systematic review of the literature. European journal of heart failure. 2007;9(5):440–449. doi: 10.1016/j.ejheart.2006.11.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ely EW, Inouye SK, Bernard GR, et al. Delirium in mechanically ventilated patients: validity and reliability of the confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU) Jama. 2001;286(21):2703–2710. doi: 10.1001/jama.286.21.2703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Inouye SK, van Dyck CH, Alessi CA, Balkin S, Siegal AP, Horwitz RI. Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113(12):941–948. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-113-12-941. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA, Jankovic A, Derry HA, Smith DM. Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 2007;27(5):672–680. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07304449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Smith DM, Ubel PA, Fagerlin A. Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 2007;27(5):663–671. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07303824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.McNaughton CD, Cavanaugh KL, Kripalani S, Rothman RL, Wallston KA. Validation of a Short, 3-Item Version of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 2015;35(8):932–936. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15581800. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ. Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med. 2004;36(8):588–594. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Parker RM, Baker DW, Williams MV, Nurss JR. The test of functional health literacy in adults: a new instrument for measuring patients’ literacy skills. J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10(10):537–541. doi: 10.1007/BF02640361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Baker DW, Williams MV, Parker RM, Gazmararian JA, Nurss J. Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 1999;38(1):33–42. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(98)00116-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Pfeiffer E. A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1975;23(10):433–441. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1975.tb00927.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–357. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Formiga F, Chivite D, Sole A, Manito N, Ramon JM, Pujol R. Functional outcomes of elderly patients after the first hospital admission for decompensated heart failure (HF). A prospective study. Archives of gerontology and geriatrics. 2006;43(2):175–185. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2005.10.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.van Walraven C, Austin PC, Jennings A, Quan H, Forster AJ. A modification of the Elixhauser comorbidity measures into a point system for hospital death using administrative data. Med Care. 2009;47(6):626–633. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31819432e5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36(1):8–27. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199801000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Kroenke K, Strine TW, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Berry JT, Mokdad AH. The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. Journal of affective disorders. 2009;114(1–3):163–173. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2008.06.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;159(7):702–706. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwh090. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Bohannon AD, Fillenbaum GG, Pieper CF, Hanlon JT, Blazer DG. Relationship of race/ethnicity and blood pressure to change in cognitive function. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002;50(3):424–429. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50104.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Little RaAH. Robust likelihood-based analysis of multivariate data with missing values. Statistica Sinica. 2004;14:949–968. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Harrell FE. Regression Modeling Strategies. 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.R: A language and environment for statistical computing. [computer program] Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.McNaughton CD, Collins SP, Kripalani S, et al. Low numeracy is associated with increased odds of 30-day emergency department or hospital recidivism for patients with acute heart failure. Circulation Heart failure. 2013;6(1):40–46. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.112.969477. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Abdel-Kader K, Dew MA, Bhatnagar M, et al. Numeracy Skills in CKD: Correlates and Outcomes. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010;5(9):1566–1573. doi: 10.2215/CJN.08121109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Yee LM, Simon MA. The role of health literacy and numeracy in contraceptive decision-making for urban Chicago women. Journal of community health. 2014;39(2):394–399. doi: 10.1007/s10900-013-9777-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Cajita MI, Cajita TR, Han HR. Health Literacy and Heart Failure: A Systematic Review. The Journal of cardiovascular nursing. 2016;31(2):121–130. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Pressler SJ, Subramanian U, Kareken D, et al. Cognitive deficits and health-related quality of life in chronic heart failure. The Journal of cardiovascular nursing. 2010;25(3):189–198. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0b013e3181ca36fe. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Riley PL, Arslanian-Engoren C. Cognitive dysfunction and self-care decision making in chronic heart failure: a review of the literature. European journal of cardiovascular nursing : journal of the Working Group on Cardiovascular Nursing of the European Society of Cardiology. 2013;12(6):505–511. doi: 10.1177/1474515113487463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Woo MA, Macey PM, Fonarow GC, Hamilton MA, Harper RM. Regional brain gray matter loss in heart failure. Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md : 1985) 2003;95(2):677–684. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00101.2003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Levin SN, Hajduk AM, McManus DD, et al. Cognitive status in patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure. Am Heart J. 2014;168(6):917–923. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2014.08.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Huynh QL, Negishi K, Blizzard L, et al. Mild cognitive impairment predicts death and readmission within 30days of discharge for heart failure. International journal of cardiology. 2016;221:212–217. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.07.074. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Davis KK, Allen JK. Identifying cognitive impairment in heart failure: a review of screening measures. Heart & lung : the journal of critical care. 2013;42(2):92–97. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2012.11.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Tung YC, Chou SH, Liu KL, et al. Worse Prognosis in Heart Failure Patients with 30-Day Readmission. Acta Cardiol Sin. 2016;32(6):698–707. doi: 10.6515/ACS20151113A. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Loop MS, Van Dyke MK, Chen L, et al. Comparison of Length of Stay, 30-Day Mortality, and 30-Day Readmission Rates in Medicare Patients With Heart Failure and With Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction. The American journal of cardiology. 2016;118(1):79–85. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.04.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Malki Q, Sharma ND, Afzal A, et al. Clinical presentation, hospital length of stay, and readmission rate in patients with heart failure with preserved and decreased left ventricular systolic function. Clinical cardiology. 2002;25(4):149–152. doi: 10.1002/clc.4960250404. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Vader JM, LaRue SJ, Stevens SR, et al. Timing and Causes of Readmission After Acute Heart Failure Hospitalization-Insights From the Heart Failure Network Trials. Journal of cardiac failure. 2016;22(11):875–883. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2016.04.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.O’Connor CM, Miller AB, Blair JE, et al. Causes of death and rehospitalization in patients hospitalized with worsening heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: results from Efficacy of Vasopressin Antagonism in Heart Failure Outcome Study with Tolvaptan (EVEREST) program. Am Heart J. 2010;159(5):841–849. e841. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.02.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Matsuoka S, Kato N, Kayane T, et al. Development and Validation of a Heart Failure-Specific Health Literacy Scale. The Journal of cardiovascular nursing. 2016;31(2):131–139. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Molloy GJ, Johnston DW, Witham MD. Family caregiving and congestive heart failure. Review and analysis. European journal of heart failure. 2005;7(4):592–603. doi: 10.1016/j.ejheart.2004.07.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Nicholas Dionne-Odom J, Hooker SA, Bekelman D, et al. Family caregiving for persons with heart failure at the intersection of heart failure and palliative care: a state-of-the-science review. Heart failure reviews. 2017 doi: 10.1007/s10741-017-9597-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental Tables

RESOURCES