Who Participates in Chronic Disease Self-management (CDSM) Programs? Differences Between Participants and Nonparticipants in a Population of Multimorbid Older Adults.

*Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health †Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine ‡Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine §Johns Hopkins Community Physicians, Baltimore, MD.
Medical care (Impact Factor: 3.23). 08/2012; 50(12). DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318268abe7
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND:: Self-care management is recognized as a key component of care for multimorbid older adults; however, the characteristics of those most likely to participate in Chronic Disease Self-Management (CDSM) programs and strategies to maximize participation in such programs are unknown. OBJECTIVES:: To identify individual factors associated with attending CDSM programs in a sample of multimorbid older adults. RESEARCH DESIGN:: Participants in the intervention arm of a matched-pair cluster-randomized controlled trial of the Guided Care model were invited to attend a 6-session CDSM course. Logistic regression was used to identify factors independently associated with attendance. SUBJECTS:: All subjects (N=241) were aged 65 years or older, were at high risk for health care utilization, and were not homebound. MEASURES:: Baseline information on demographics, health status, health activities, and quality of care was available for CDSM participants and nonparticipants. Participation was defined as attendance at 5 or more CDSM sessions. RESULTS:: A total of 22.8% of multimorbid older adults who were invited to CDSM courses participated in 5 or more sessions. Having better physical health (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]=2.3 [1.1-4.8]) and rating one's physician poorly on support for patient activation (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]=2.8 [1.3-6.0]) were independently associated with attendance. CONCLUSIONS:: Multimorbid older adults who are in better physical health and who are dissatisfied with their physicians' support for patient activation are more likely to participate in CDSM courses.

Download full-text


Available from: Melissa Dattalo, Oct 23, 2014
1 Follower
29 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract To make a difference to patients who increasingly suffer multiple chronic conditions, in a healthcare system that is capable of providing excellent care but is often ineffective and at cross-purposes in its application, means being prepared to take a different approach not only to the delivery of patient care, but to the education of physicians and other healthcare professionals. The model we must now practice and teach is one that emphasizes collaboration and prevention, quality and efficiency. Changes in practice recommended by the 2001 US Institute of Medicine report are being implemented system-wide, following the enactment of the US Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This paper discusses the evolving needs of patients with chronic psychiatric illness, and the psychiatrist's role in a rapidly changing healthcare landscape as a care provider, an interdisciplinary role model, and educator. In an aging population in which multi-morbidity is the norm, episodic, crisis-driven care is prohibitively expensive and does not serve patients well. Yet we still teach that model of care. The medications we prescribe for psychiatric illness, particularly antipsychotics, can cause and/or aggravate some of the commonest chronic medical illnesses; psychiatric educators must address the management of these complications. The management of chronic psychiatric illness in multi-morbid patients demands that we practice and teach a 'whole patient' approach to care, preferably delivered as part of a patient-centred team. The Affordable Care Act has mandated and created opportunities for new models designed to facilitate this, and a paradigm shift is needed in medical education. Clinicians must become adept at identifying underlying and contributing factors and collaborating with the patient, other providers, and the patient's family and significant others. Psychiatric formulation and patient care rely on these principles; we must now teach their application to other specialties, disciplines and professions.
    International Review of Psychiatry 06/2013; 25(3):319-28. DOI:10.3109/09540261.2013.782854 · 1.80 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Fit & Strong! program is an evidence-based, multi-component program promoting physical activity among older adults, particularly those suffering from lower-extremity osteoarthritis. The primary purpose of the study is to examine if the Fit & Strong! program translated into a lay-leader model can produce comparable outcomes to the original program taught by physical therapists and/or certified exercise instructors. A single-group, pre-post study design was employed, and data were collected at the baseline (n = 136 participants) and the intervention conclusion (n = 71) with both baseline and post-intervention data. The measurements included socio-demographic information, health- and behavior-related information, and health-related quality of life. Various statistical tests were used for the program impact analysis and examination of the association between participant characteristics and program completion. As in the original study, there were statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvements in self-efficacy for exercise, aerobic capacity, joint stiffness, level of energy, and amount and intensity of physical activities. The odds of completing the program were significantly lower for the participants from rural areas and those having multiple chronic conditions. Successful adaptation of the Fit & Strong! program to a lay-leader model can increase the likelihood of program dissemination by broadening the selection pool of instructors and, hence, reducing the potential issue of resource limitation. However, high program attrition rates (54.1%) emphasize the importance of adopting evidence-based strategies for improving the retention of the participants from rural areas and those with multiple chronic conditions.
    Frontiers in Public Health 04/2015; 2. DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2014.00187