Myocardial Infarction
Conditions
Keywords
lifestyle change, telephone follow-up, Roy Adaptation Model
Brief summary
In this parallel randomized controlled trial (n = 33/group), the control group received routine care, while the intervention group received a telephone follow-up intervention, which consisted of a pre-discharge education program and three telephone follow-up sessions based on the Roy Adaptation Model.
Detailed description
Objective: To evaluate the effect of education and telephone follow-up intervention based on the Roy Adaptation Model (RAM) for improving MI patients' self-efficacy, quality of life and lifestyle adaptation. Methods: In this parallel randomized controlled trial (n = 33/group), the control group received routine care, while the intervention group received a telephone follow-up intervention, which consisted of a pre-discharge education program and three telephone follow-up sessions based on the RAM. Data were collected before discharge, and in the 12th week after discharge included quality of life, coping adaptation process, self-efficacy and lifestyle changes.
Interventions
OTHEREducation and telephone follow-up intervention
A telephone follow up and a pre-discharge education
Sponsors
Akdeniz University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Masking description
Single blinding was provided that included inclusion criteria and agreement to participate in the study
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
30 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
1. Participants were adults aged ≥30 years and had been admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of MI (which must be supported by ECG and an increase in biomarkers). 2. were clinically stable 3. willing to participate 4. able to understand and write Turkish 5. able to receive telephone calls or fill in questionnaires. 6. able to come to the hospital for checkups.
Exclusion criteria
Patients were excluded from the study if according to medical file records they had chronic renal failure, cancer, heart failure, severe aortic stenosis, if they were planned for surgical treatment or had chronic cognitive and psychiatric disease, if they had problems with hearing and speaking on the phone, or if they had mobility restriction.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| General Self-Efficacy Scale | 12 week | The self-efficacy levels of the patients were measured by the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES). The GSES contains 10 items and each item score ranges from 0 to 5. Cronbach's α of the GSES was 0.83. The highest and lowest possible score is between 10-40. High score indicates that the individual perceives high self-efficacy. |
| Coping and Adaptation scale | 12 week | To evaluate the coping and adaptation processes, the Coping and Adaptation (CAPS) scale was used. The CAPS was developed by Callista Roy. The Turkish validity and reliability study of the scale was conducted by Çatal and Dicle (2015), and the Cronbach alpha value was 0.82 for the total scale. The highest and lowest possible score is between 47-188. Higher scores indicate better use of effective coping methods. |
| Myocardial Infarction Dimensional Assessment Scale | 12 week | To evaluate the quality of life after the disease, the Myocardial Infarction Dimensional Assessment Scale (MIDAS) was used. This was developed by Thompson et al. in 2002. The Cronbach alpha values of the scale were found in seven dimensions, and ranged from 0.74 to 0.95, showing it to be a useful and highly reliable tool. The validity and reliability study of the scale was made by Yilmaz et al. Cronbach alpha values ranged from 0.79 to 0.90. The 10 highest and lowest possible score is between 0-100, with 0 indicating the best health condition, and 100 indicating the worst health condition. |
Outcome results
None listed