BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Support groups of peers were designed to convey support specific to stressful situations encountered by persons with a first-time myocardial infarction and by their spouse or partners. There were no previous published support intervention studies focused on the couple. Survivors and spouses (n=28) participated in a pilot study which tested the effect of a 12-week support group intervention. DESIGN: The support groups for couples were cofacilitated by a peer and professional. The facilitators recorded field notes, while participants completed weekly diaries about the intervention activities. Following the intervention, participants were interviewed individually and facilitators were interviewed jointly about the perceived effect of the intervention and influencing factors. This article focuses on the facilitators' and participants' perceptions of intervention processes and outcomes. FINDINGS: Support processes in the group included social comparison, social learning, and social exchange. Three types of support--emotional, information, and affirmation--were provided. All participants were satisfied with the support intervention and referred to the positive effect on their coping, confidence, outlook, and spousal relationship. Factors that influenced the intervention effect were participant input, cofacilitation, similarity of group members, and the provision of information and support. CONCLUSIONS: Future interventions could consider similarity of peers, leadership, and optimum timing and duration.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Support groups of peers were designed to convey support specific to stressful situations encountered by persons with a first-time myocardial infarction and by their spouse or partners. There were no previous published support intervention studies focused on the couple. Survivors and spouses (n=28) participated in a pilot study which tested the effect of a 12-week support group intervention. DESIGN: The support groups for couples were cofacilitated by a peer and professional. The facilitators recorded field notes, while participants completed weekly diaries about the intervention activities. Following the intervention, participants were interviewed individually and facilitators were interviewed jointly about the perceived effect of the intervention and influencing factors. This article focuses on the facilitators' and participants' perceptions of intervention processes and outcomes. FINDINGS: Support processes in the group included social comparison, social learning, and social exchange. Three types of support--emotional, information, and affirmation--were provided. All participants were satisfied with the support intervention and referred to the positive effect on their coping, confidence, outlook, and spousal relationship. Factors that influenced the intervention effect were participant input, cofacilitation, similarity of group members, and the provision of information and support. CONCLUSIONS: Future interventions could consider similarity of peers, leadership, and optimum timing and duration.
Authors: Matthew E Dupre; Alicia Nelson; Scott M Lynch; Bradi B Granger; Hanzhang Xu; Erik Churchill; Janese M Willis; Lesley H Curtis; Eric D Peterson Journal: Am J Med Sci Date: 2017-07-25 Impact factor: 2.378
Authors: Bernice C Yates; Joseph Norman; Jane Meza; Kaye Stanek Krogstrand; Susana Harrington; Scott Shurmur; Matthew Johnson; Karen Schumacher Journal: J Cardiovasc Nurs Date: 2015 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.083