Key result
Lay-facilitated angina management is perceived to support self-management but still requires clinical expertise for complex care.
Why the study?
Does a lay-facilitated angina management programme improve patient experiences and self-management in patients with stable angina compared to usual care?
Does a lay-facilitated angina management programme improve patient experiences and self-management in patients with stable angina compared to usual care?
Lay facilitation can support self-management in stable angina, but clinical expertise remains necessary for complex information and care needs.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Patient perceptions endorse lay facilitation for angina self-management; leaves open its added value versus nurse advice in broader trials.
AIM: This paper is a report of a qualitative study conducted as part of a randomized controlled trial comparing a lay-facilitated angina management programme with usual care. Its aim was to explore participants' beliefs, experiences, and attitudes to the care they had received during the trial, particularly those who had received the angina management intervention. BACKGROUND: Angina affects over 50 million people worldwide. Over half of these people have symptoms that restrict their daily life and would benefit from knowing how to manage their condition. DESIGN: A nested qualitative study within a randomized controlled trial of lay-facilitated angina management. METHOD: We conducted four participant focus groups during 2008; three were with people randomized to the intervention and one with those randomized to control. We recruited a total of 14 participants to the focus groups, 10 intervention, and 4 control. FINDINGS: Although recruitment to the focus groups was relatively low by comparison to conventional standards, each generated lively discussions and a rich data set. Data analysis demonstrated both similarities and differences between control and intervention groups. Similarities included low levels of prior knowledge about angina, whereas differences included a perception among intervention participants that lifestyle changes were more easily facilitated with the help and support of a lay-worker. CONCLUSION: Lay facilitation with the Angina Plan is perceived by the participants to be beneficial in supporting self-management. However, clinical expertise is still required to meet the more complex information and care needs of people with stable angina.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nelson et al. (2012) studied Angina (n=14). Lay-facilitated angina management programme vs. Usual care was evaluated on Participants' beliefs, experiences, and attitudes to the care received. A lay-facilitated angina management programme was perceived by participants as beneficial for supporting self-management, though clinical expertise remains necessary for complex care needs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: