Measuring the Impact of MyLupusGuide in Canada: Results of a Randomized Controlled Study.
Journal
Arthritis care & research
ISSN: 2151-4658
Titre abrégé: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101518086
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2023
03 2023
Historique:
revised:
04
01
2022
received:
01
06
2021
accepted:
22
02
2022
pubmed:
1
3
2022
medline:
25
2
2023
entrez:
28
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study was undertaken to assess the effects of a web-based program, MyLupusGuide, developed to facilitate self-management in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). In this randomized controlled online study, participants received either immediate access to the MyLupusGuide site or delayed access starting on month 3. The primary outcome was the patient activation measure (PAM) score. Secondary outcomes included measurements of health status, self-efficacy, coping, perceived patient-physician relationship, and medication adherence. Outcomes were measured at the baseline visit and at the 3-month and 6-month follow-up visits. We used linear mixed modeling to compare PAM scores between the 2 groups at months 3 and 6. There were 541 participants included in this study. The mean ± SE age was 50 ± 14 years; 93% were female and 74% were White. The mean ± SE disease duration was 17 ± 12 years, and 56% visited MyLupusGuide at least once. The baseline mean ± SE PAM score was 61.2 ± 13, with 36% scoring low for perceived self-management skills. After 3 months of exposure to MyLupusGuide, there were no differences in terms of PAM scores between groups. In exploratory analyses, we found significant improvement in PAM scores in those who had low PAM scores at baseline and in male individuals. We observed significant improvements in self-efficacy before and after access to MyLupusGuide and delayed improvements at month 6 compared to month 3 in terms of mental health and emotional coping. MyLupusGuide increases self-efficacy but not patient activation. A total of 56% of participants visited the MyLupusGuide site during the study period. Individuals with lupus need support to become activated toward self-management behaviors.
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02950714']
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
529-539Informations de copyright
© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.
Références
Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making--pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 2012;366:780-1.
Bolen SD, Chandar A, Falck-Ytter C, et al. Effectiveness and safety of patient activation interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. J Gen Intern Med 2014;29:1166-76.
Alegría M, Carson N, Flores M, et al. Activation, self-management, engagement, and retention in behavioral health care: a randomized clinical trial of the DECIDE intervention. JAMA Psychiatry 2014;71:557-65.
Greene J, Hibbard JH. Why does patient activation matter? An examination of the relationships between patient activation and health-related outcomes. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:520-6.
Hibbard JH, Cunningham PJ. How engaged are consumers in their health and health care, and why does it matter? Res Brief 2008:1-9.
Rask KJ, Ziemer DC, Kohler SA, et al. Patient activation is associated with healthy behaviors and ease in managing diabetes in an indigent population. Diabetes Educ 2009;35:622-30.
Mosen DM, Schmittdiel J, Hibbard J, et al. Is patient activation associated with outcomes of care for adults with chronic conditions? J Ambul Care Manage 2007;30:21-9.
Lorig KR, Ritter PL, Dost A, et al. The Expert Patients Programme online, a 1-year study of an internet-based self-management programme for people with long-term conditions. Chronic Illn 2008;4:247-56.
Hochberg MC, for the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American College of Rheumatology. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus [letter]. Arthritis Rheum 1997;40:1725.
Petri M, Orbai AM, Alarcón GS, et al. Derivation and validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64:2677-86.
Neville C, Da Costa D, Mill C, et al. The needs of persons with lupus and health care providers: a qualitative study aimed toward the development of the Lupus Interactive Navigator™. Lupus 2014;23:176-82.
Neville C, Da Costa D, Rochon M, et al. Toward the development of a lupus interactive navigator to facilitate patients and their health care providers in the management of lupus: results of web-based surveys. JMIR Res Protoc 2014;3:e65.
Neville C, Da Costa D, Rochon M, et al. Development of the Lupus Interactive Navigator as an empowering web-based eHealth tool to facilitate lupus management: users perspectives on usability and acceptability. JMIR Res Protoc 2016;5:e44.
Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, et al. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res 2004;39:1005-26.
Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, et al. Development and testing of a short form of the Patient Activation Measure. Health Serv Res 2005;40:1918-30.
Adams RJ. Improving health outcomes with better patient understanding and education. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2010;3:61-72.
Tzeng A, Tzeng TH, Vasdev S, et al. The role of patient activation in achieving better outcomes and cost-effectiveness in patient care. JBJS Rev 2015;3:e4.
Marshall R, Beach MC, Saha S, et al. Patient activation and improved outcomes in HIV-infected patients. J Gen Intern Med 2013;28:668-74.
Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF- 36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473-83.
Stoll T, Gordon C, Seifert B, et al. Consistency and validity of patient administered assessment of quality of life by the MOS SF-36; its association with disease activity and damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 1997;24:1608-14.
McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993;31:247-63.
Karlson EW, Daltroy LH, Rivest C, et al. Validation of a Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire (SLAQ) for population studies. Lupus 2003;12:280-6.
Yazdany J, Yelin EH, Panopalis P, et al. Validation of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Activity Questionnaire in a large observational cohort. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59:136-43.
Liang MH, Socher SA, Larson MG, et al. Reliability and validity of six systems for the clinical assessment of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 1989;32:1107-18.
Costenbader KH, Khamashta M, Ruiz-Garcia S, et al. Development and initial validation of a self-assessed lupus organ damage instrument. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2010;62:559-68.
Lorig K, Chastain RL, Ung E, et al. Development and evaluation of a scale to measure perceived self-efficacy in people with arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1989;32:37-44.
Lorig K, Holman H. Arthritis self-efficacy scales measure self-efficacy. Arthritis Care Res 1998;11:155-7.
Keefe FJ, Lefebvre JC, Kerns RD, et al. Understanding the adoption of arthritis self-management: stages of change profiles among arthritis patients. Pain 2000;87:303-13.
Kwan A, Marzouk S, Ghanean H, et al. Assessment of the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcomes of depression and anxiety in systemic lupus erythematosus. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2019;49:260-6.
Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM. Concurrent and predictive validity of a self- reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care 1986;24:67-74.
Endler NS, Parker JD, Summerfeldt LJ. Coping with health problems: developing a reliable and valid multidimensional measure. Psychol Assess 1998;10:195-205.
Endler NS, Parker JD, Summerfeldt LJ. Coping with Health, Injuries and Problems (CHIP™): user's manual. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems 1999.
Czajkowski SM, Terrin M, Lindquist R, et al. Comparison of preoperative characteristics of men and women undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (the Post Coronary Artery Bypass Graft [CABG] Biobehavioral Study). Am J Cardiol 1997;79:1017-24.
Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med 1991;32:705-14.
Stewart AL, Nápoles-Springer AM, Gregorich SE, et al. Interpersonal processes of care survey: patient-reported measures for diverse groups. Health Serv Res 2007;42:1235-56.
Forsman AK, Nordmyr J, Wahlbeck K. Psychosocial interventions for the promotion of mental health and the prevention of depression among older adults. Health Promot Int 2011;26 Suppl 1:i85-107.
Crutzen R, Viechtbauer W, Spigt M, et al. Differential attrition in health behaviour change trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Health 2015;30:122-34.
Wangberg SC, Bergmo TS, Johnsen JA. Adherence in internet-based interventions. Patient Prefer Adherence 2008;2:57-65.
Fortin PR, Da Costa D, Neville C, et al. The challenges of perceived self-management in lupus. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2022;74:1113-21.
Cotter AP, Durant N, Agne AA, et al. Internet interventions to support lifestyle modification for diabetes management: a systematic review of the evidence. J Diabetes Complications 2014;28:243-51.
Thompson AE, Anisimowicz Y, Miedema B, et al. The influence of gender and other patient characteristics on health care-seeking behaviour: a QUALICOPC study. BMC Fam Pract 2016;17:38.
Statistics Canada. Canadian internet use survey. 2019. Report No.: publication no. 11-001-X.