| Literature DB >> 35206131 |
Izabella Uchmanowicz1, Kenneth M Faulkner2, Ercole Vellone3, Agnieszka Siennicka4, Remigiusz Szczepanowski5, Agnieszka Olchowska-Kotala6.
Abstract
Self-care behaviors are essential for the effective treatment of heart failure (HF), and poor self-care may lead to adverse clinical events in patients with HF. A growing body of literature addresses the need to analyze the characteristics of both patient and caregiver since they are in mutual, long-term interaction, and their reactions to events are dependent on each other. One of the most common approaches for analyzing data on HF self-care dyads is the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM). The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review to answer the following question: what did we learn from HF dyadic studies based on the APIM approach? Medline, Academic Search Ultimate, and CINAHL Complete databases were searched, using the terms "dyad," "dyadic," and "heart failure," for studies published between 2009 and April 2021. Fifteen studies were reviewed from a pool of 106 papers. Studies using the APIM approach revealed interrelated patient and caregiver characteristics that influence self-care and explain many complex dyadic behaviors. Our analysis provided evidence that (1) APIM is a useful analytical approach; (2) a family-oriented approach can improve the functioning of a patient with HF; and (3) social support from caregivers significantly enhances patients' adaptation to illness.Entities:
Keywords: Actor–Partner Interdependence Model (APIM); caregiver; dyad; dyadic care; heart failure; patients; self-care behaviors
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35206131 PMCID: PMC8871794 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19041919
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure A1The Actor–Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) used to analyze dyadic data.
Figure 1PRISMA table outlining literature search.
Characteristic of eligible studies.
| Author/Year | Country; Sample | Main Outcome Measure(s) | Aim of the Study | Main Results | Main Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Lyons et al., 2020) | USA; | Patient Health Questionnaire | To examine the role |
- Patients who conceal their worries and concerns from their care partner may be at risk for increased depressive symptoms and hospitalizations | Patient concealment of worries or concerns (lack of open communication) is a risk factor for patient depressive symptoms and healthcare utilization; one’s own perception of the relationship could have the protective factor. |
| (Thomson et al., 2020) | UK; | Brief Symptom Inventory; | To examine relationship between emotional symptoms and health-related quality of life |
- No differences in emotional symptoms and health-related quality of life between patients with heart failure and their caregivers | Emotional aspects of dealing with heart failure may affect the caregivers as much as their partners who have the illness; |
| (Chung et al., 2009) | USA; | Brief Symptom Inventory; | To explore impact of emotional distress on quality of life (QoL) |
- Both patients’ and spousal caregivers’ depressive symptoms and anxiety influenced their own quality of life (actor effect) | Patients with HF may be particularly vulnerable to the emotional distress of their spouse caregivers; interventions to reduce depression and anxiety and to improve patients’ quality of life should include both patients and spouses. |
| (Al-Rawashdeh et al., 2017) | USA; | Sleep disturbance: a composite score of four common sleep complaints; | To determine whether sleep disturbances of patients and their spousal caregivers predicted their own and their partners’ quality of life | - Each individual’s sleep disturbance predicted their own poor physical and mental well-being (actor effect), while spousal caregivers’ sleep disturbance predicted patient’s mental well-being (partner effect) | Patients’ mental well-being is sensitive to their spouses’ sleep disturbance; |
| (Lyons et al., 2015) | Italy; | Self-Care of HF Index (SCHFI) and | To identify individual and dyadic determinants of self-care confidence |
- Both patients and caregivers reported moderate levels of confidence, with caregivers reporting slightly higher confidence than patients | Caregiver mental health must be prioritized; better caregiver mental health and greater relationship quality were the modifiable hallmarks of better self-care confidence in both the patient and the caregiver; |
| (Hooker et al., 2018) | USA; | Mutuality Scale of the Family Caregiving Inventory; | To examine the associations among patient/caregiver self-care confidence and mutuality and caregiver perceived burden. |
- Patients and caregivers who perceived better mutuality were more confident in patient self-care (actor effect only) | Mutuality in patient–caregiver dyads is associated with patient self-care and caregiver burden and may be an important intervention target to improve self-care and reduce hospitalizations; |
| (Bidwell et al., 2015) | Italy; | Short-Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12); | To identify determinants of patient and caregiver contributions to HF self-care maintenance (daily adherence and symptom monitoring) and management (appropriate recognition and response to symptoms) |
- Both patients and caregivers reported low levels of HF maintenance and management behaviors | There is the need to examine HF self-care maintenance and management in the context of the patient-caregiver dyad; |
| (Buck et al., 2015) | USA; | Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9); | To describe the dyadic characteristics of mood and perception of the relationship in HF patients and |
- Higher levels of depression or anxiety for the caregiver predicted lower HF self-care maintenance scores for the patient (partner effect) | Caregivers’ mood states and perception of the relationship impacts the patient and their own engagement in HF self-care as well as the caregiver’s self-efficacy. |
| (Vellone et al., 2014) | Italy; | Self-care of HF Index (SCHFI) and Caregiver Contribution to Self-care of HF Index (CC-SCHFI); | To explore relationship between self-care behavior and quality of life |
- Higher self-care was related to lower physical QoL in patients and caregivers | In caregivers, confidence in the ability to support patients in the performance of self-care improved caregivers’ mental QoL; |
| (Shamali et al., 2019) | Denmark; | The Family Functioning, Health and Social Support(FAFHES) | To examine whether perceived social support from nurses is associated with better family functioning of patients with heart failure and their nearest relatives |
- The higher the level of family health of the nearest relative, the better the family functioning of the patient (partner effect) | Social support from nurses could increase the level of family health and family functioning. |
| (Strömberg et al., 2021) | Sweden; | Control Attitude Scale; | To examine on |
- Perceived control over HF was significantly associated with their partners’ emotional well-being | Lack of control over heart disease in any |
| (Lyons et al., 2018) | USA; | European | To examine the role of congruent engagement in HF-management behaviors on the |
- Higher levels of engagement by one’s partner were associated with lower levels of depressive symptoms for both membersof the couple | Partner’s level of engagement plays an |
| (Vellone et al., 2018) | Italy; | Mutuality Scale; | To evaluate the influence of the total mutuality and its dimensions on self-care maintenance, management, and confidence in HF patient–caregiver dyads |
- Higher patient mutuality was associated with better self-care maintenance and confidence, and higher caregiver mutuality was associated with better caregiver self-care confidence | The quality of the |
| (Dellafiore et al., 2019) | Italy; | Mutuality Scale; | To evaluate the associations among mutuality, anxiety, and depressionin HF patient–caregiver dyads |
- Higher patient mutuality in his/her relationship with the caregiver was associated with lower patient anxiety and depression | Good relationship with patients is not “protective” against anxiety and depression in caregivers. |
| (Bugajski et al., 2020) | Italy; | Self-care of HF Index (SCHFI) and Caregiver Contribution to Self-care of HF Index (CC-SCHFI); | To examine the role of HF self-care dyadic type congruence on patient self-care (maintenance, symptom perception, and management) |
- Dyad congruence was a significant predictor of patient’s symptom perception scores but not self-care maintenance or management. | Congruence in HF dyads is associated with better patient symptom perception; |
Figure A2Relationships between caregiver and patient characteristics in studies employing APIM.
Figure A3Results regarding caregiver quality of life and emotional aspects of dealing with HF patient.