自我管理干预是否能改善中风后的自我效能感和与健康相关的生活质量?系统回顾。

IF 6.3 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
International Journal of Stroke Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-24 DOI:10.1177/17474930251340286
Elizabeth A Lynch, Katie Nesbitt, Aarti Gulyani, Raymond J Chan, Niranjan Bidargaddi, Dominique A Cadilhac, Billie Bonevski, Fiona Jones, Liam P Allan, Erin Godecke, Rebecca Barnden, Emily Brogan, Thoshenthri Kandasamy, Stacy Larcombe, Lemma N Bulto, Coralie English
{"title":"自我管理干预是否能改善中风后的自我效能感和与健康相关的生活质量?系统回顾。","authors":"Elizabeth A Lynch, Katie Nesbitt, Aarti Gulyani, Raymond J Chan, Niranjan Bidargaddi, Dominique A Cadilhac, Billie Bonevski, Fiona Jones, Liam P Allan, Erin Godecke, Rebecca Barnden, Emily Brogan, Thoshenthri Kandasamy, Stacy Larcombe, Lemma N Bulto, Coralie English","doi":"10.1177/17474930251340286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Self-management interventions are recommended after stroke in many international guidelines to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Self-efficacy, a person's confidence in their abilities, is widely considered to underpin individuals' abilities to self-manage their health.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of self-management programs for improving self-efficacy or HRQoL in stroke survivors.</p><p><strong>Summary of review: </strong>The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023440168). We searched databases including Medline, Emcare, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and trial registries from inception to 13/12/2024. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of a self-management intervention to no/another intervention for survivors of stroke on self-efficacy or HRQoL were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria. Meta-analyses for self-efficacy and HRQoL were performed using random effect model. From 13,608 abstracts screened, 44 randomized controlled trials involving 5931 participants were included. Median time post-stroke of recruited participants ranged from 14 days to 3 years. Time required to deliver the interventions ranged from 45 min to 72 h. Self-management interventions in all included trials had multiple components, predominantly education (N = 40, 91%) and goal setting (N = 39, 89%). Interventions were delivered to individual survivors of stroke (N = 18, 41%), groups of survivors (N = 15, 34%), both individual and group delivery to survivors (N = 5, 11%) and individually to survivor-carer dyads (N = 6, 14%). Interventions were delivered entirely face-to-face (N = 28, 64%), entirely by phone or video-conferencing (N = 7, 16%) or a combination of these delivery modes (N = 9, 20%). There was low certainty evidence that self-management programs compared to no intervention did not significantly improve self-efficacy on pooled effect sizes (SMD 0.08, 95%CI -0.02 to 0.18). There was moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs had a marginal significant effect on HRQoL (SMD 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13). Limitations to the review include marked variation between included studies in the interventions delivered, and outcome measures used, targeted behaviors and time since stroke.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Self-management programs varied markedly in content and dose. There is low-certainty evidence that currently designed self-management programs do not significantly improve self-efficacy. There is moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs have a small effect on HRQoL after stroke.</p>","PeriodicalId":14442,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Stroke","volume":" ","pages":"786-800"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12264303/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do self-management interventions improve self-efficacy and health-related quality of life after stroke? A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth A Lynch, Katie Nesbitt, Aarti Gulyani, Raymond J Chan, Niranjan Bidargaddi, Dominique A Cadilhac, Billie Bonevski, Fiona Jones, Liam P Allan, Erin Godecke, Rebecca Barnden, Emily Brogan, Thoshenthri Kandasamy, Stacy Larcombe, Lemma N Bulto, Coralie English\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17474930251340286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Self-management interventions are recommended after stroke in many international guidelines to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Self-efficacy, a person's confidence in their abilities, is widely considered to underpin individuals' abilities to self-manage their health.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of self-management programs for improving self-efficacy or HRQoL in stroke survivors.</p><p><strong>Summary of review: </strong>The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023440168). We searched databases including Medline, Emcare, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and trial registries from inception to 13/12/2024. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of a self-management intervention to no/another intervention for survivors of stroke on self-efficacy or HRQoL were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria. Meta-analyses for self-efficacy and HRQoL were performed using random effect model. From 13,608 abstracts screened, 44 randomized controlled trials involving 5931 participants were included. Median time post-stroke of recruited participants ranged from 14 days to 3 years. Time required to deliver the interventions ranged from 45 min to 72 h. Self-management interventions in all included trials had multiple components, predominantly education (N = 40, 91%) and goal setting (N = 39, 89%). Interventions were delivered to individual survivors of stroke (N = 18, 41%), groups of survivors (N = 15, 34%), both individual and group delivery to survivors (N = 5, 11%) and individually to survivor-carer dyads (N = 6, 14%). Interventions were delivered entirely face-to-face (N = 28, 64%), entirely by phone or video-conferencing (N = 7, 16%) or a combination of these delivery modes (N = 9, 20%). There was low certainty evidence that self-management programs compared to no intervention did not significantly improve self-efficacy on pooled effect sizes (SMD 0.08, 95%CI -0.02 to 0.18). There was moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs had a marginal significant effect on HRQoL (SMD 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13). Limitations to the review include marked variation between included studies in the interventions delivered, and outcome measures used, targeted behaviors and time since stroke.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Self-management programs varied markedly in content and dose. There is low-certainty evidence that currently designed self-management programs do not significantly improve self-efficacy. There is moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs have a small effect on HRQoL after stroke.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Stroke\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"786-800\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12264303/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Stroke\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930251340286\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930251340286","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在许多国际指南中,卒中后自我管理干预被推荐用于改善与健康相关的生活质量(HRQoL)。自我效能感,一个人对自己能力的信心,被广泛认为是个人自我管理健康能力的基础。目的:综合证据证明自我管理方案对提高脑卒中幸存者自我效能感或HRQoL的有效性。综述摘要:该方案已在国际前瞻性系统评价登记册(CRD42023440168)注册。我们检索了Medline、Emcare、Scopus、Cochrane Library、CINAHL和试验注册数据库,检索时间从开始到2024年12月13日。仅纳入了比较自我管理干预与无干预或另一种干预对中风幸存者自我效能感或HRQoL影响的随机对照试验(RCTs)。采用Cochrane协作标准评估偏倚风险。采用随机效应模型对自我效能感和HRQoL进行meta分析。从筛选的13,608篇摘要中,纳入了44项随机对照试验,涉及5,931名参与者。参与者中风后的中位时间从14天到3年不等。提供干预所需的时间从45分钟到72小时不等。在所有纳入的试验中,自我管理干预有多个组成部分,主要是教育(N=40, 91%)和目标设定(N=39, 89%)。干预措施分别针对中风幸存者个体(N=18, 41%)、幸存者群体(N=15, 34%)、幸存者个体和群体(N=5, 11%)以及幸存者-照顾者二人组(N=6, 14%)。干预措施完全面对面(N= 28,64%),完全通过电话或视频会议(N= 7,16%)或这些交付模式的组合(N= 9,20%)提供。有低确定性证据表明,与不干预相比,自我管理计划在综合效应量上没有显著提高自我效能(SMD为0.08,95%CI为-0.02至0.18)。有中等确定性证据表明,自我管理计划对HRQoL有边际显著影响(SMD为0.07,95% CI为0.01至0.13)。本综述的局限性包括纳入的研究在提供的干预措施、使用的结果测量、目标行为和中风后的时间方面存在显著差异。结论:自我管理方案在内容和剂量上存在显著差异。有低确定性的证据表明,目前设计的自我管理方案并没有显著提高自我效能。有中等确定性的证据表明,自我管理方案对卒中后HRQoL的影响很小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do self-management interventions improve self-efficacy and health-related quality of life after stroke? A systematic review.

Introduction: Self-management interventions are recommended after stroke in many international guidelines to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Self-efficacy, a person's confidence in their abilities, is widely considered to underpin individuals' abilities to self-manage their health.

Aims: To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of self-management programs for improving self-efficacy or HRQoL in stroke survivors.

Summary of review: The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023440168). We searched databases including Medline, Emcare, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and trial registries from inception to 13/12/2024. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of a self-management intervention to no/another intervention for survivors of stroke on self-efficacy or HRQoL were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria. Meta-analyses for self-efficacy and HRQoL were performed using random effect model. From 13,608 abstracts screened, 44 randomized controlled trials involving 5931 participants were included. Median time post-stroke of recruited participants ranged from 14 days to 3 years. Time required to deliver the interventions ranged from 45 min to 72 h. Self-management interventions in all included trials had multiple components, predominantly education (N = 40, 91%) and goal setting (N = 39, 89%). Interventions were delivered to individual survivors of stroke (N = 18, 41%), groups of survivors (N = 15, 34%), both individual and group delivery to survivors (N = 5, 11%) and individually to survivor-carer dyads (N = 6, 14%). Interventions were delivered entirely face-to-face (N = 28, 64%), entirely by phone or video-conferencing (N = 7, 16%) or a combination of these delivery modes (N = 9, 20%). There was low certainty evidence that self-management programs compared to no intervention did not significantly improve self-efficacy on pooled effect sizes (SMD 0.08, 95%CI -0.02 to 0.18). There was moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs had a marginal significant effect on HRQoL (SMD 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13). Limitations to the review include marked variation between included studies in the interventions delivered, and outcome measures used, targeted behaviors and time since stroke.

Conclusion: Self-management programs varied markedly in content and dose. There is low-certainty evidence that currently designed self-management programs do not significantly improve self-efficacy. There is moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs have a small effect on HRQoL after stroke.

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
International Journal of Stroke
International Journal of Stroke 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
13.90
自引率
6.00%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Stroke is a welcome addition to the international stroke journal landscape in that it concentrates on the clinical aspects of stroke with basic science contributions in areas of clinical interest. Reviews of current topics are broadly based to encompass not only recent advances of global interest but also those which may be more important in certain regions and the journal regularly features items of news interest from all parts of the world. To facilitate the international nature of the journal, our Associate Editors from Europe, Asia, North America and South America coordinate segments of the journal.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信