4.4 Article

Internet-based chronic disease self-management - A randomized trial

Journal

MEDICAL CARE
Volume 44, Issue 11, Pages 964-971

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000233678.80203.c1

Keywords

self-management; chronic disease; self-efficacy; internet

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The small-group Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP) has proven effective in changing health-related behaviors and improving health statuses. An Internet-based CDSMP was developed to reach additional chronic-disease patients. Objectives: We sought to determine the efficacy of the Internetbased CDSMP. Design: We compared randomized intervention participants with usual-care controls at 1 year. We compared intervention participants with the small-group CDSMP at 1 year. Subjects: Nine-hundred fifty-eight patients with chronic diseases (heart, lung, or type 2 diabetes) and Internet and e-mail access were randomized to intervention (457) or usual care control (501). Measures: Measures included 7 health status variables (pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, illness intrusiveness, health distress, disability, and self-reported global health), 4 health behaviors (aerobic exercise, stretching and strengthening exercise, practice of stress management, and communication with physicians), 3 utilization variables (physician visits, emergency room visits, and nights in hospital), and self-efficacy. Results: At 1 year, the intervention group had significant improvements in health statuses compared with usual care control patients. The intervention group had similar results to the small-group CDSMP participants. Change in self-efficacy at 6 months was found to be associated with better health status outcomes at 1 year. Conclusions: The Internet-based CDSMP proved effective in improving health statutes by I year and is a viable alternative to the small-group Chronic Disease Self Management Program.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available