Why the study?
Does an ongoing training program improve quality of life in patients with heart failure?
Does an ongoing training program improve quality of life in patients with heart failure?
A continuous educational program significantly improves the physical, emotional, and total quality of life in patients with heart failure compared to routine care.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports incorporating ongoing training into HF care; confirms QOL benefits of educational programs in this RCT.
INTRODUCTION: Heart failure is one of the most common cardiovascular diseases which decrease the quality of life. Most of the factors influencing the quality of life can be modified with educational interventions. Therefore, this study examined the impact of a continuous training program on quality of life of patients with heart failure. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial study was conducted during May to August 2011. Forty four participants with heart failure referred to Shahid Madani's polyclinics of Tabriz were selected through convenient sampling method and were randomly allocated to two groups. The intervention group (n = 22) received ongoing training including one-to-one teaching, counseling sessions and phone calls over 3 months. The control group (n = 22) received routine care program. Data on quality of life was collected using the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire at baseline as well as three months later. RESULTS: The statistical tests showed significant differences in the physical, emotional dimensions and total quality of life in intervention group. But in control group, no significant differences were obtained. There was not any significant association in demographic characteristics and quality of life. CONCLUSION: Ongoing training programs can be effective in improving quality of life of patients with heart failure. Hence applying ongoing educational program as a non-pharmacological intervention can help to improve the quality of life of these patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lakdizaji et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: