重构哮喘和吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)以改变治疗信念:一项在线随机对照试验

C. Katzer, V. Wileman, A. Chan, Stephanie J. C. Taylor, R. Horne
{"title":"重构哮喘和吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)以改变治疗信念:一项在线随机对照试验","authors":"C. Katzer, V. Wileman, A. Chan, Stephanie J. C. Taylor, R. Horne","doi":"10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.OA1644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ICS nonadherence contributes to poor asthma control. Perceptions of asthma and ICS are important determinants, particularly doubts about ICS-necessity (N) and concerns (C) about harm. Our intervention, the Balance Model (BM), communicates a common-sense rationale for ICS-N and addresses C using health psychology theory. We examined its effect on ICS-beliefs and adherence in people without asthma (asthma-naive, a proxy for newly-diagnosed patients) and with asthma. We randomised 503 adults reporting asthma and 388 asthma-naive to: Control (NHS-information) vs BM-text vs BM-video. N-C medication beliefs, adherence and intentions were assessed post-intervention and follow-up (2wk). Asthma-naive: BM-video participants reported higher N (F(2,252)=7.1, p=.001) and lower C (F(2,252)=9.6, p Asthma: Medication beliefs group differences were non-significant, but N increased in BM-video participants post intervention (t(150)=-2.54, p=0.012) and follow-up. In the BM-text group C decreased (t(151)=2.19, p=0.029) post intervention only. The BM-text group reported higher adherence at follow-up than controls (t(230)=-2.42, p=0.016). The BM, especially as a video, could help newly-diagnosed people develop a medically accurate, common-sense understanding of asthma and ICS motivating adherence. In the asthma group the BM changed ICS-beliefs and reported adherence but the effects were smaller, equivalent to NHS-information, likely due to fixed beliefs based on experience, requiring more intensive, personalised approaches.","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reframing asthma and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to modify treatment beliefs: an online randomised controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"C. Katzer, V. Wileman, A. Chan, Stephanie J. C. Taylor, R. Horne\",\"doi\":\"10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.OA1644\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ICS nonadherence contributes to poor asthma control. Perceptions of asthma and ICS are important determinants, particularly doubts about ICS-necessity (N) and concerns (C) about harm. Our intervention, the Balance Model (BM), communicates a common-sense rationale for ICS-N and addresses C using health psychology theory. We examined its effect on ICS-beliefs and adherence in people without asthma (asthma-naive, a proxy for newly-diagnosed patients) and with asthma. We randomised 503 adults reporting asthma and 388 asthma-naive to: Control (NHS-information) vs BM-text vs BM-video. N-C medication beliefs, adherence and intentions were assessed post-intervention and follow-up (2wk). Asthma-naive: BM-video participants reported higher N (F(2,252)=7.1, p=.001) and lower C (F(2,252)=9.6, p Asthma: Medication beliefs group differences were non-significant, but N increased in BM-video participants post intervention (t(150)=-2.54, p=0.012) and follow-up. In the BM-text group C decreased (t(151)=2.19, p=0.029) post intervention only. The BM-text group reported higher adherence at follow-up than controls (t(230)=-2.42, p=0.016). The BM, especially as a video, could help newly-diagnosed people develop a medically accurate, common-sense understanding of asthma and ICS motivating adherence. In the asthma group the BM changed ICS-beliefs and reported adherence but the effects were smaller, equivalent to NHS-information, likely due to fixed beliefs based on experience, requiring more intensive, personalised approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":228043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical education, web and internet\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical education, web and internet\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.OA1644\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical education, web and internet","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.OA1644","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

不遵守ICS会导致哮喘控制不良。对哮喘和ICS的认知是重要的决定因素,特别是对ICS必要性的怀疑(N)和对危害的担忧(C)。我们的干预,平衡模型(BM),传达了ICS-N的常识性原理,并使用健康心理学理论解决了C。我们研究了它对非哮喘(哮喘初始,新诊断患者的代表)和哮喘患者的ics信念和依从性的影响。我们将503名报告哮喘的成年人和388名哮喘新手随机分为:对照(NHS-information) vs脑卒中文本vs脑卒中视频。干预后和随访(2周)评估N-C用药信念、依从性和意向。哮喘初发:bm视频参与者报告较高的N (F(2252)=7.1, p= 0.001)和较低的C (F(2252)=9.6, p)哮喘:药物信念组差异不显著,但bm视频参与者在干预后(t(150)=-2.54, p=0.012)和随访后N增加。在BM-text组中,C组仅在干预后下降(t(151)=2.19, p=0.029)。BM-text组随访时的依从性高于对照组(t(230)=-2.42, p=0.016)。BM,尤其是作为视频,可以帮助新诊断的人对哮喘和ICS激励依从性有一个医学上准确的、常识性的理解。在哮喘组,BM改变了ics信念和报告的依从性,但效果较小,相当于nhs信息,可能是由于基于经验的固定信念,需要更密集,个性化的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reframing asthma and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to modify treatment beliefs: an online randomised controlled trial
ICS nonadherence contributes to poor asthma control. Perceptions of asthma and ICS are important determinants, particularly doubts about ICS-necessity (N) and concerns (C) about harm. Our intervention, the Balance Model (BM), communicates a common-sense rationale for ICS-N and addresses C using health psychology theory. We examined its effect on ICS-beliefs and adherence in people without asthma (asthma-naive, a proxy for newly-diagnosed patients) and with asthma. We randomised 503 adults reporting asthma and 388 asthma-naive to: Control (NHS-information) vs BM-text vs BM-video. N-C medication beliefs, adherence and intentions were assessed post-intervention and follow-up (2wk). Asthma-naive: BM-video participants reported higher N (F(2,252)=7.1, p=.001) and lower C (F(2,252)=9.6, p Asthma: Medication beliefs group differences were non-significant, but N increased in BM-video participants post intervention (t(150)=-2.54, p=0.012) and follow-up. In the BM-text group C decreased (t(151)=2.19, p=0.029) post intervention only. The BM-text group reported higher adherence at follow-up than controls (t(230)=-2.42, p=0.016). The BM, especially as a video, could help newly-diagnosed people develop a medically accurate, common-sense understanding of asthma and ICS motivating adherence. In the asthma group the BM changed ICS-beliefs and reported adherence but the effects were smaller, equivalent to NHS-information, likely due to fixed beliefs based on experience, requiring more intensive, personalised approaches.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The value of a pleural fellowship post Comparison of physicians’ and medical students’ knowledge in the treatment and prevention of COPD according to the final results of the ASCO-II study COPD.Pal: Using a person-based approach to develop a self-management app for people with COPD Children’s interstital lung diseases (chILD) – an area of unmet educational need? Impact of COVID-19 on Tunisian pulmonology trainees
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1