Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective To investigate the factors influencing health beliefs regarding facial nerve rehabilitation training in patients with peripheral facial paralysis (PFP), and to provide a reference for developing precise and individualized facial nerve rehabilitation training programs for this population. Methods Guided by the Health Belief Model (HBM), this descriptive qualitative study employed purposive sampling to recruit 16 patients with PFP who had received facial nerve rehabilitation training in healthcare settings. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and the data were analyzed using codebook thematic analysis. Results Through data analysis, five overarching themes and 23 subthemes were identified: Perceived Threat of the Disease (appearance impairment, emotional distress, disease course concern, diminished role functioning, disease burden); Perceived Benefits of Health Behaviors (improvement of facial paralysis symptoms, emotional improvement, social participation, image enhancement, reduced disease burden); Perceived Barriers to Health Behaviors (memory difficulties, inconsistencies in guidance content and methods, emotional interference, time–space constraints, low perceived importance); Cues to Action (professional guidance, post-discharge referral services, family support, stage goal setting, health benefits, peer support); and Self-efficacy (perseverance, ability to regulate training intensity). Discussion Health beliefs regarding facial nerve rehabilitation training in patients with PFP are influenced by multiple interrelated factors. Healthcare providers should promptly identify and respond to perceived barriers to health behaviors, reinforce the perception of disease threat and benefits of health behaviors, and utilize cues to action and self-efficacy as key entry points for intervention. Tailored rehabilitation guidance and recommendations should be provided to enhance patients' adherence to facial nerve rehabilitation training and improve their quality of life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: