The study by Koerts and Horváth, titled “Exploring Health Literacy among Adults with Hidradenitis Suppurativa,” highlights critical gaps in health literacy levels among patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) [1]. This investigation underscores the dual challenges faced by this population – not only grappling with the debilitating nature of HS but also struggling to comprehend medical information vital to their care [1]. These findings emphasize the urgent need for tailored educational interventions and enhanced support from healthcare providers to bridge these gaps.
In a complementary study, Karamitros et al. “Evaluating the Internet as a Source of Information for Patients With Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Review of Websites’ Content, Insights. Into Engagement, and Access,” identify substantial deficiencies in the quality of online resources available to HS patients [2]. The authors reveal that inconsistent, low-quality, and potentially misleading digital content further complicates informed decision-making, placing an additional barrier between patients and effective disease management [2].
Together, these studies illuminate the interplay between health literacy and the quality of information, demonstrating that neither issue exists in isolation. Instead, they are deeply interconnected, with poor health literacy limiting patients’ ability to critically evaluate online resources [3], while suboptimal digital content undermines foundational understanding and engagement [2]. These complementary investigations offer actionable insights, emphasizing the necessity of a dual approach to improve health outcomes: enhancing health literacy through tailored interventions and ensuring the accuracy, reliability, and accessibility of online information.
Low health literacy has consistently been associated with poorer patient outcomes, including reduced adherence to treatment regimens, increased complication rates, and impaired patient-provider communication [4‒8]. In an era where healthcare providers increasingly value shared decision-making with their patients, research underscoring the significance of health literacy is more timely than ever. Empowering patients to actively participate in their care requires clinicians to remain vigilant of the challenges faced by those with limited health literacy. Utilizing all available resources to address health inequalities within this demographic is not just a recommendation – it is an ethical imperative. This emphasizes the need for high-quality health information materials and resources that prioritize patient-centered care and ensure equitable access to quality healthcare for all individuals, irrespective of socioeconomic status, academic background, or literacy level [9].
The study by Koerts and Horváth underscores the far-reaching impact of limited health literacy, which can exacerbate healthcare disparities, hinder adherence to treatment regimens, and impair patient-provider communication [1]. Addressing this limitation requires a multifaceted strategy, including the development of plain-language resources, patient-centered educational tools, and proactive clinician-patient dialog. The importance of addressing health literacy has been recognized at the highest levels, with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) issuing guidelines for “Clear & Simple” communication [10]. These guidelines assist health communicators in developing audience-appropriate materials and effectively reaching individuals with limited health literacy skills. Integrating health literacy assessments into routine care can further help clinicians identify gaps and deliver more effective support tailored to individual patient needs.
Karamitros et al. [2] build on this perspective by highlighting the role of digital information in empowering patients. Access to accurate, well-structured, and engaging online resources is essential to mitigate misinformation risks and support shared decision-making. The study underscores the need for collaboration between healthcare professionals, content creators, and multidisciplinary teams to develop validated, patient-centric platforms [2]. Incorporating readability standards, visual aids, and culturally sensitive content is paramount to ensuring equitable access to high-quality information for diverse populations.
Crucially, these studies converge on the insight that improving health literacy and information quality amplifies their respective impacts. Enhanced health literacy equips patients to critically evaluate and effectively use online resources [4‒6, 9], while access to reliable content strengthens their understanding of HS and fosters meaningful engagement in their care [2]. Together, these interventions have the potential to transform HS care by improving clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and adherence to treatment plans.
Future efforts must build on these insights through longitudinal research to assess the combined impact of health literacy initiatives and high-quality information on long-term outcomes such as quality of life and healthcare utilization. Healthcare providers should actively guide patients toward credible resources while adopting communication strategies that account for varying literacy levels [11‒14]. Simultaneously, institutions and policymakers must prioritize the creation and dissemination of validated, accessible, and inclusive educational materials [15].
In conclusion, both studies by Koerts and Horváth and Karamitros et al. [2] provide a roadmap for advancing patient education and empowerment in HS care [1]. By addressing health literacy and elevating the quality of online information as complementary strategies, the dermatology and plastic surgery community can mitigate key barriers to effective care. This approach exemplifies the transformative potential of integrating educational and information initiatives to achieve equitable, patient-centered healthcare, setting the standard for a new era in healthcare.
Acknowledgments
Michael P. Grant was not available to confirm coauthorship, but the corresponding author Dr. Georgios Karamitros affirms that Michael P. Grant contributed to the paper, had the opportunity to review the final version to be published, and guarantees Dr. Michael P. Grant’s coauthorship status and the accuracy of the author contribution and conflict of interest.
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Funding Sources
This research was conducted without any external financial support.
Author Contributions
Study concept and design and drafting of the manuscript: G.K; and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: G.K., H.J.F., M.P.G., and G.A.L.
References
