Gholam Reza Nikrahan1, Laura Suarez2, Karim Asgari1, Scott R Beach3, Christopher M Celano3, Mehrdad Kalantari1, Mohammad Reza Abedi4, Ali Etesampour5, Rezaei Abbas6, Jeff C Huffman7. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. 2. Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University of Borujen, Borujen, Iran (GRN); Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University of Borujen, Borujen, Iran (GRN); Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 4. Department of Consulting, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Najafabad Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran. 6. Department of Immunology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. 7. Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University of Borujen, Borujen, Iran (GRN); Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Electronic address: jhuffman@mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Positive psychologic characteristics have been linked to superior cardiac outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Accordingly, in this exploratory study, we assessed positive psychology interventions in patients who had recently undergone a procedure to treat cardiovascular disease. METHOD: Participants were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 different 6-week face-to-face interventions or a wait-list control condition. We assessed intervention feasibility and compared changes in psychologic outcome measures postintervention (7wk) and at follow-up (15wk) between intervention and control participants. Across the interventions, 74% of assigned sessions were completed. RESULTS: When comparing outcomes between interventions and control participants (N = 55 total), there were no between-group differences post-intervention, but at follow-up intervention participants had greater improvements in happiness (β = 14.43, 95% CI: 8.66-20.2, p < 0.001), depression (β = -3.87, 95% CI: -7.72 to 0.02, p = 0.049), and hope (β = 7.12, 95% CI: 1.25-13.00, p =0.017), with moderate-large effect sizes. Efficacy of the 3 interventions was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to identify an optimal positive psychology intervention for cardiac patients.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Positive psychologic characteristics have been linked to superior cardiac outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Accordingly, in this exploratory study, we assessed positive psychology interventions in patients who had recently undergone a procedure to treat cardiovascular disease. METHOD:Participants were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 different 6-week face-to-face interventions or a wait-list control condition. We assessed intervention feasibility and compared changes in psychologic outcome measures postintervention (7wk) and at follow-up (15wk) between intervention and control participants. Across the interventions, 74% of assigned sessions were completed. RESULTS: When comparing outcomes between interventions and control participants (N = 55 total), there were no between-group differences post-intervention, but at follow-up intervention participants had greater improvements in happiness (β = 14.43, 95% CI: 8.66-20.2, p < 0.001), depression (β = -3.87, 95% CI: -7.72 to 0.02, p = 0.049), and hope (β = 7.12, 95% CI: 1.25-13.00, p =0.017), with moderate-large effect sizes. Efficacy of the 3 interventions was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to identify an optimal positive psychology intervention for cardiac patients.
Authors: C R Snyder; C Harris; J R Anderson; S A Holleran; L M Irving; S T Sigmon; L Yoshinobu; J Gibb; C Langelle; P Harney Journal: J Pers Soc Psychol Date: 1991-04
Authors: Jeff C Huffman; Christina M DuBois; Carol A Mastromauro; Shannon V Moore; Laura Suarez; Elyse R Park Journal: J Health Psychol Date: 2014-08-11
Authors: Christina M Dubois; Scott R Beach; Todd B Kashdan; Maren B Nyer; Elyse R Park; Christopher M Celano; Jeff C Huffman Journal: Psychosomatics Date: 2012 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.386
Authors: Corline Brouwers; Paula M C Mommersteeg; Ivan Nyklíček; Aline J Pelle; Bert L W J J M Westerhuis; Balázs M Szabó; Johan Denollet Journal: Biol Psychol Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 3.251
Authors: Joep van Agteren; Matthew Iasiello; Laura Lo; Jonathan Bartholomaeus; Zoe Kopsaftis; Marissa Carey; Michael Kyrios Journal: Nat Hum Behav Date: 2021-04-19
Authors: Christopher M Celano; Melanie E Freedman; Eleanor E Beale; Federico Gomez-Bernal; Jeff C Huffman Journal: J Nerv Ment Dis Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 2.254
Authors: Ka Yan Ho; Katherine Ka Wai Lam; Daniel Thomas Bressington; Jessie Lin; Yim Wah Mak; Cynthia Wu; William H C Li Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 3.006