The effectiveness and experience of self-management following acute coronary syndrome:a review of the literature

Article English OPEN
Guo, Ping ; Harris, Ruth (2016)
  • Publisher: Elsevier Ltd
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.05.008
  • Subject: Acute coronary syndrome | interventions | nursing | experiences | self-management | conceptual framework | scoping review

Objectives:<br/>To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions used to support self-management, and to explore patients’ experiences after acute coronary syndrome in relation to self-management. <br/><br/>Design:<br/>Scoping review. Data sources Keyword search of CINAHL Plus, Medline, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO databases for studies conducted with adult population and published in English between 1993 and 2014. <br/><br/>Review methods: <br/>From title and abstract review, duplicated articles and obviously irrelevant studies were removed. The full texts of the remaining articles were assessed against the selection criteria. Studies were included if they were original research on 1) effectiveness of self-management interventions among individuals following acute coronary syndrome; or 2) patients’ experience of self-managing recovery from acute coronary syndrome. Results 44 articles (19 quantitative and 25 qualitative) were included. Most studies were conducted in western countries and quantitative studies were UK centric. Self-management interventions tended to be complex and include several components, including education and counselling, goal setting and problem solving skills which were mainly professional-led rather than patient-led. The review demonstrated variation in the effectiveness of self-management interventions in main outcomes assessed - anxiety and depression, quality of life and health behavioural outcomes. For most participants in the qualitative studies, acute coronary syndrome was unexpected and the recovery trajectory was a complex process. Experiences of making adjustment and adopting lifestyle changes following acute coronary syndrome were influenced by subjective life experiences and individual, sociocultural and environmental contexts. Participants’ misunderstandings, misconceptions and confusion about disease processes and management were another influential factor. They emphasised a need for ongoing input and continued support from health professionals in their self-management of rehabilitation and recovery, particularly during the initial recovery period following hospital discharge. <br/><br/>Conclusions:<br/>Evidence of the effectiveness of self-management interventions among people with acute coronary syndrome remains inconclusive. Findings from the patients’ experiences in relation to self-management following acute coronary syndrome provided important insights into what problems patients might have encountered during self-managing recovery and what support they might need, which can be used to inform the development of self-management interventions. Theoretical or conceptual frameworks have been minimally employed in these studies and should be incorporated in future development and evaluation of self-management interventions as a way of ensuring clarity and consistency related to how interventions are conceptualised, operationalised and empirically studied. Further research is needed to evaluate self-management interventions among people following acute coronary syndrome for sustained effect and within different health care contexts.
  • References (15)
    15 references, page 1 of 2

    1. 2. Wang et al. 2012, Lewin net al. 2002, Barlow et al. 2009, Lacey et al. 2004, Furze et al. 2012, Aish & Isenberg 1996

    Dalal et al. 2007 (Taylor et al. 2007), O'Rourke & Hampson 1999, Ocampo-Balabagno 1999, Petrie et al. 2002a

    Zetta et al. 2011, Petrie et al. 2002, Linden 1995

    Muniz et al. 2010, Ocampo-Balabagno 1999, Hawkes et al. 2013 (Turkstra et al. 2013, O'Neil et al. 2014), Holmes-Rovner et al. 2008, Fernandes et al. 2009, Wang et al. 2012, Lewin et al. Dalal et al. M2007 (Taylor et al. 2007), O'Rourke & Hampson 1999 2002, Zetta et al. 2011, Linden 1995, Aish & Isenberg 1996, Lacey et al. 2004, Furze et al. 2012, Barlow et al. 2009

    Lewin et al. 2002, Dalal et al. 2007 (Taylor et al. 2007), Aish & Isenberg 1996, OcampoBalabagno 1999, Zetta et al. 2011, Linden 1995

    O'Neil et al. 2014), Muniz et al. u2010, Furze et al. 2012, Holmes-Rovner et al. 2008, Dalal et al. 2007 Wang et al. 2012, Lewin et al. 2002, Barlow et al. 2009, Hawkes et al. 2013 (Turkstra et al. 2013, Fernandes et al. 2009 n

    (Taylor et al. 2007) , Aish & Isenberg 1996, Zetta et al. 2011, Petrie et al. 2002 Lacey et al. 2004, O'Rourke & Hampson 1999

    Ocampo-Balabagno 1999

    Fernandes et al. 2009, Barlow et al. 2009, Hawkes et al. 2013, Muniz et al. 2010, Furze et al. 2012, Dalal et al. 2007, Zetta et al. 2011, Holmes-Rovner et al. 2008

    O'Rourke & Hampson 1999

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark