Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T22:11:21.464Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Antibiotic awareness: exploring knowledge among culturally and linguistically diverse patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2025

Kylie TranOpen the ORCID record for Kylie Tran[Opens in a new window],
Vinushan Kuganathan,
Jessica Lam,
Aqsa Rana,
Serine Yau,
Katherine Lee,
Ravindra DotelOpen the ORCID record for Ravindra Dotel[Opens in a new window],
Chin-Yen YeoOpen the ORCID record for Chin-Yen Yeo[Opens in a new window] and
Ronald L. CastelinoOpen the ORCID record for Ronald L. Castelino[Opens in a new window]
Kylie Tran
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, NSW, Australia
Vinushan Kuganathan
Affiliation:
Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Jessica Lam
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, NSW, Australia
Aqsa Rana
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, NSW, Australia
Serine Yau
Affiliation:
Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, NSW, Australia
Katherine Lee
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, NSW, Australia
Ravindra Dotel
Affiliation:
Infectious Diseases Department, Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, NSW, Australia
Chin-Yen Yeo
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Concord Hospital, Sydney, Australia
Ronald L. Castelino*
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, NSW, AustraliaThe University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
*
Corresponding author: Ronald L.Castelino; Email: ronald.castelino@sydney.edu.au

Abstract

Background:

Effective antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs must address the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) patients who often experience language barriers and varying cultural beliefs regarding antibiotics. They are at greater risk of receiving suboptimal or inappropriate care, yet guidance to support AMS practices for this population remains limited.

Aim:

To investigate antibiotic knowledge, perspectives, and experiences of CALD patients.

Methods:

A cross-sectional survey was conducted between May to November 2023 at a Western Sydney tertiary hospital. Adult patients of CALD background on systemic antibiotics for more than 72 hours under surgical, respiratory, and geriatric specialties were surveyed on their understanding of their antibiotic treatment.

Results:

Of the 177 patients, median age was 70 years old (21–99 years), and 95/177 (53.7%) were males. Of the 177 patients, 171/177 (96.6%) reported speaking a language other than English at home. While 160/177 (90.4%) patients were told that they were treated with antibiotics, only 67/177 (37.9%) were told about duration, 35/177 (19.8%) were told about the side effects, and 27/177 (15.3%) were given written information. Information was provided by doctors to 125/177 (70.6%) patients, 72/177 (40.7%) by nurses, and 3/177 (1.7%) by pharmacists. Patients preferred to have received information from their doctor 79/177 (44.6%) or any healthcare professional 91/177 (51.4%).

Conclusion:

Improving antibiotic education for CALD patients is essential to address communication gaps. Enhancing knowledge will support appropriate use, improved adherence and outcomes, and promote shared decision-making. Strengthening health literacy in CALD populations should be a priority for AMS programs.

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , 2026, e193
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is used to distribute the re-used or adapted article and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America

Introduction

Health literacy, defined as the ability to obtain, process, and understand health information, is a major determinant of health outcomes.2 High health literacy empowers individuals to follow medical advice correctly, recognize the importance of adhering to prescribed treatments and seek information, all of which contributes to better health outcomes. Health information and systems have become increasingly complex and difficult to understand. Like many other developed countries, Australia’s population faces challenges of low literacy levels.3 Almost 60% of Australian adults have low health literacy with a notable overrepresentation from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds.3 Similarly, in the United Kingdom 40% of the population struggle with health content that has been developed for consumers, and 60% have difficulty with content involving numbers and statistics. 4 In the United States, the National Assessment of Adult Literacy Survey found that 36% of the adult population had basic or below-basic health literacy.Reference Kutner, Greenberg and Jin5

There is a strong causal link between low health literacy and adverse events.3 In Australia, 250,000 hospital admissions and 400,000 emergency presentations each year are related to medication problems – half of which are preventable.Reference Phillips, Nigro and Macolino6 Reference Lim, Ellett and Semple7 Antibiotics are high-risk medications which can cause significant patient harm when misused. Yet, many consumers tend to overestimate the benefits whilst underestimating their associated risks. In Australia, infections are a leading cause for hospital readmission, causing significant burden to the healthcare system.Reference Lydeamore, Mitchell and Bucknall8 Poor patient understanding of prescribed antibiotic treatment contributes to non-adherence, treatment failure, and readmission. Improving health literacy can support engagement with using antibiotics appropriately and helping to prevent antimicrobial resistance (AMR).Reference Tang, Millar and Moore9

The AMS Clinical Care Standard (CCS) was developed by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care to reduce healthcare variation and outline the expected care for consumers who are prescribed an antibiotic. The AMS CCS recommends that consumers prescribed antibiotics should receive information on their use, when to stop, potential side effects, and a review plan. This is essential to support shared decision-making and enhance adherence to treatment.10

Despite these expectations of care set by the AMS CCS, there are evident gaps and variation in the delivery of antibiotic information to consumers. Healthcare workers may find it a challenge to provide comprehensive information to CALD populations due to language barriers.

The study aims to investigate the health literacy, perspectives, and experiences of CALD patients prescribed antibiotic therapy at a tertiary hospital in Western Sydney, Australia. This research seeks to improve understanding of the drivers and barriers of antibiotic health literacy in CALD patients and identify future strategies or interventions to deliver safe, quality care, particularly around quality use of antibiotics.

Methods

The 21-question survey was adapted from a study in Melbourne, Australia, on patient understanding of antimicrobial treatmentReference Yeoh, George and Rajkhowa11 and informed by the investigator’s experiences. The survey included both multiple-choice and close-ended questions (Appendix 1) on demographics, patient’s understanding of antibiotic information received, and what patient’s wanted to know about their treatment. Prior antibiotic knowledge was not assessed in the questionnaire. It was piloted among a subset of elderly and non-English-speaking patients for validation. After piloting, the survey was translated by the Health Literacy Hub12 into the following languages: Mandarin, Arabic, Filipino, and Hindi. These languages were chosen as they were the most common languages spoken in Western Sydney.Reference Justice13 14 As older adults are more likely to be hospitalized than younger populations, piloting with this group helped ensure that the questions were clear and understandable for the majority of hospitalized patients.1The study was approved by the Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2021/ETH11803).

The survey was conducted over May to November 2023 at a Western Sydney tertiary hospital. The study recruited adult CALD patients (≥18 yr) admitted under the surgical, geriatric, or respiratory specialties who had been on systemic antibiotics for acute infections for at least 72 hours. These specialties were chosen due to the high volume of antibiotic use in these specialties. CALD patients were defined as individuals born overseas and were limited to the ethnic groups: Arabic, Chinese, Indian, and Filipino. Exclusion criteria included patients aged under 18 years, admitted under other specialties and had an intensive care unit (ICU) admission during the same hospital encounter. Patients unable to read or write, had a cognitive impairment or a disability were also excluded. Additionally, patients who were receiving antibiotics for prophylaxis rather than treatment of an acute infection were excluded. Patients meeting the study criteria were identified from a list generated via the Cerner Reporting Portal. The Cerner Reporting Portal is a component of the Cerner electronic health record (EHR) system, which is used in Western Sydney Local Health District.

Patients were screened for eligibility based on their birthplace and inclusion in the specified ethnic groups. Following this process, their medication chart was screened to ensure duration of systemic antibiotics was ≥ 72 hours. Investigators then approached eligible patients to invite them to take part in the study. Surveys were either completed by the patient, carer, or family member, or with the assistance of a translator. Participation in the study was voluntary, and patients provided written consent before completing the survey. A sample size of at least 150 patients was considered sufficient for a descriptive survey-based study and is comparably larger than a similar study conducted in Melbourne, Australia.Reference Yeoh, George and Rajkhowa11

Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Demographic variables and responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and results presented as percentages and frequencies.

Results

A total of 177 survey responses were collected. The median age of patients was 70 years old (21–99), and 95/177 (53.7%) were male. Languages other than English were spoken at home by 171/177 patients (96.6%), with a further 6/177 (3.4%) reporting partially speaking another language (Table 1). When accessing health services, 45/177 (25.5%) expressed a need for an interpreter. Majority of CALD patients surveyed did not speak English as their primary language. Patient’s country of birth, primary language spoken, and education level are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of patients surveyed

It was reported by 160/177 (90.4%) patients that a doctor, nurse, pharmacist, or allied health professional (hospital staff member) informed them they were taking an antibiotic, and 158/177 (89.3%) knew why they were taking the antibiotic. However, only 27/177 (15.3%) were given written information about the antibiotic, and just 23/177 (13.0%) patients were given information in a language that they understood. There were 67/177 (37.9%) patients who were informed of their treatment duration and 35/177 (19.8%) informed on the side effects. A total of 92/177 (52.0%) patients reported that a hospital staff member explained that their treatment would be reviewed. Additionally, 62/177 (35.0%) knew they had to continue the antibiotic at home, yet only 43/177 (24.3%) had been told how to take it, while 19/177 (10.7%) had not.

A total of 125/177 (70.6%) patients reported that they were informed about their antibiotic treatment by a doctor, 72/177 (40.7%) by a nurse, 3/177 (1.7%) by a pharmacist, and 22/177 (12.4%) by other health care workers. Patients reported wanting the following information:

confirmation that they were taking an antibiotic (78/177; 44.1%), potential side effects (106/177; 59.9%), interactions with other medications (75/177; 42.4%), duration of treatment (96/177; 54.2%), and other antibiotic-related information (16/177; 9.0%). Of the delivery of the information, 47/177 (26.6%) patients reported that they preferred written information, 44/177 (24.9%) preferred verbal, and 86/177 (48.6%) preferred both written and verbal information. When asked whom they would like the information to be delivered by, 79/177 (44.6%) patients preferred a doctor, 16/177 (9.0%) preferred a nurse, 8/177 (4.5%) preferred a pharmacist, and 91/177 (51.4%) preferred any health care professional.

Discussion

There are significant gaps in the provision of antibiotic information to CALD patients. The findings from this study reflect similar research conducted in Melbourne.Reference Yeoh, George and Rajkhowa11 In both studies, while the majority of patients were informed they were receiving antibiotics, only one-fifth were informed of the potential side effects, and just over one-third were informed on the duration of treatment. Only a small proportion of patients received written information in both studies. Communication gaps may occur due to language barrier, limited time available for counseling, and limited understanding of healthcare workers on how to convey culturally appropriate information.

A systematic review on antibiotic use in aged care explored the views of residents, carers, and family members. The review highlights the need for more targeted research to understand consumer attitudes and beliefs about antibiotic use.Reference Gyawali, Gamboa and Rolfe15 The systematic review reported that all but one of the included studies had sample sizes smaller than 50 participants, making our study one of the largest of its kind.Reference Gyawali, Gamboa and Rolfe15

Limitations of this study include challenges with potential recall bias, as the data collected relied on the patient’s memory. Additionally, selection bias and varying levels of literacy amongst those chosen may have affected the reliability of data collected. The study was conducted at a single site which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, there were several limitations to the questionnaire, including use of close-ended questions, the absence of general medication literacy questions, count of admissions to hospital, and questions related to transition to outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy. These limitations restricted the ability to gain further insights and guide improvement strategies.

The study did not collected information on what language patients that received written information received it in. However, it is likely that the resources were provided in English, as that is the language in which the hospital resources are written.

The findings demonstrate variability in the level of information communicated and understood by CALD patients. It is important to improve communication strategies including standardizing written materials in multiple languages and providing training on culturally appropriate care. Future research should explore the effectiveness of these strategies in improving patient understanding and outcomes.

Engaging patients in shared decision-making is crucial in improving AMS.16 Educating patients about the appropriate use of antibiotics especially the distinction between bacterial and viral infections, is essential in combating misconceptions about antimicrobials.Reference Cals, Boumans and Lardinois17 Effective communication with CALD patients supports informed treatment choices which in turn improves their overall health outcomes. Strengthening health literacy in CALD populations should be a priority for AMS programs.

Table 2.

Patient responses to antibiotic information provided at the hospital

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2025.10108

Acknowledgements

This project was made possible through a grant provided by the Western Sydney Local Health District Research and Education Network. We gratefully acknowledge their support, which enabled the successful completion of this work.

Competing interests

All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

References

Australian Government Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Older Australians Canberra: AIHW; 2024 [Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/older-people/older-australians/contents/health/health-care-gps-specialists accessed June 2025.Google Scholar
Australian Government Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. What are determinants of health? Canberra: AIHW; 2024 [Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health/what-are-determinants-of-health#literacy accessed June 2025.Google Scholar
Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. Health literacy:Taking action to improve safety and quality. Sydney: ACSQHC, 2014.Google Scholar
National Health Service. Health literacy London: NHS England; 2023 [Available from: https://service-manual.nhs.uk/content/health-literacy accessed June 2025.Google Scholar
Kutner, M, Greenberg, E, Jin, Y, et al. The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Washington D.C: National Centre for Education Statistics, 2006.Google Scholar
Phillips, AL, Nigro, O, Macolino, KA. Hospital admissions caused by adverse drug events: an Australian prospective study. Aust Health Rev 38, 2014, 51–57.10.1071/AH12027CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lim, R, Ellett, LMK, Semple, S, et al. The extent of medication-related hospital admissions in Australia: a review from 1988 to 2021. Drug Saf 2022;45:249–57. doi: 10.1007/s40264-021-01144-1 [published Online First: 20220128]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lydeamore, MJ, Mitchell, BG, Bucknall, T, et al. Burden of five healthcare associated infections in Australia. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control 2022;11:69. doi: 10.1186/s13756-022-01109-8 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tang, KWK, Millar, BC, Moore, JE. Improving health literacy of antibiotic use in people with cystic fibrosis (CF)—comparison of the readability of patient information leaflets (PILs) from the EU, USA and UK of 23 CF-related antibiotics used in the treatment of CF respiratory infections. JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance 2023;5 doi: 10.1093/jacamr/dlad129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. Antimicrobial Stewardship Clinical Care Standard. Sydney: ACSQHC, 2020.Google Scholar
Yeoh, K, George, C, Rajkhowa, A, et al. Assessing patient understanding of their antimicrobial treatment: how are we doing and how might we improve? Infect Dis Health 2020;25:302-08. doi: 10.1016/j.idh.2020.07.003 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NSW Government. Statewide health literacy hub Sydney: NSW Government; 2024 [Available from: https://www.healthliteracyhub.org.au/about-the-health-literacy-hub/ accessed June 2025.Google Scholar
NSW Government. District profile: Western Sydney district. In: Justice, C, ed. Sydney: NSW Government, 2023.Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics. Blacktown: 2021 census all persons quickStats Canberra: ABS; 2022 [Available from: https://abs.gov.au/census/find-census-data/quickstats/2021/LGA10750 accessed June 2025.Google Scholar
Gyawali, R, Gamboa, S, Rolfe, K, et al. Consumer perspectives on antibiotic use in residential aged care: a mixed-methods systematic review. American Journal of Infection Control 2024;52:1452-59. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2024.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. Involving consumers in antimicrobial stewardship. Sydney: ACSQHC, 2018.Google Scholar
Cals, JW, Boumans, D, Lardinois, RJ, et al. Public beliefs on antibiotics and respiratory tract infections: an internet-based questionnaire study. Br J Gen Pract 2007;57:942-7. doi: 10.3399/096016407782605027 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1.Baseline characteristics of patients surveyed

Figure 1

Table 2.Patient responses to antibiotic information provided at the hospital

Supplementary material: File

Tran et al. supplementary material

Tran et al. supplementary material
Download Tran et al. supplementary material(File)
File 20.9 KB