Key result
Higher health literacy and social support link to better HF self-care, explaining ~22% of variance.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to describe the associations between health literacy, social support, and self-care behaviours in older adults with heart failure.
Are health literacy and social support associated with self-care behaviours in older adults with heart failure?
Cross-Sectional (n=252)
No
Are health literacy and social support associated with self-care behaviours in older adults with heart failure?
Health literacy and social support are positively associated with self-care behaviors in older adults with heart failure, suggesting targets for future interventions.
Supports targeting health literacy and social support in HF care; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective trials before practice change.
Aim: To describe the associations between health literacy, social support and self-care behaviours in older adults with heart failure. Design: A cross-sectional descriptive study. Methods: A total of 252 older adults were recruited from a tertiary care hospital from September 2018-February 2019. Structured questionnaires and medical record reviews were used for data collection. Two steps of hierarchical regression analysis were employed to determine the predictors of self-care behaviours. Together, they explained 22% of the variance in self-care behaviours. Conclusion: Health literacy and perceived social support were positively associated with self-care behaviours among older heart failure patients. Our findings can help health professionals develop heart failure self-care interventions to enhance health literacy skills and social support for older adults.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jo et al. (2020) conducted a cross-sectional in heart failure (n=252). Health literacy and social support was evaluated on self-care behaviours (p=<0.001). Health literacy and perceived social support were positively associated with self-care behaviours among older adults with heart failure, together explaining 22% of the variance (P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: