D C Greenwood1, K R Muir, C J Packham, R J Madeley. 1. Nottingham School of Public Health, Department of Public Health Medicine and Epidemiology, University Hospital, Queen's Medical Centre.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of psychosocial factors in the aetiology of coronary heart disease continues to be debated. Despite public perception of a major role for their effect, scientific opinion on their relevance remains divided. This paper reviews the literature on the influence of social support and life stress on coronary heart disease incidence and mortality. METHODS: Observational studies published in English, based on over 100 human subjects from the general population, investigating life stress or social support were considered. Fourteen studies derived from MEDLINE searches on MeSH headings: coronary disease; stress, psychological; social support; social isolation; life change events. An equivalent search of BIDS and studies referenced by papers identified using these sources was carried out. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The review concludes that both life stress and social support were found to have an influence on coronary heart disease, social support more so than stress. Both have a stronger influence on coronary heart disease mortality than on initial incidence of clinical disease. Measures of the quality of support, in particular emotion support, show the largest effects. The review highlights problems in drawing conclusions from the available literature; in particular, the inconsistency in measures used to define the psychosocial factors. Further studies are needed to investigate interrelationships between stress and social support, and a recommendation is made to adopt pragmatic measures in future studies, which if proven to have an effect, may be open to modification.
BACKGROUND: The role of psychosocial factors in the aetiology of coronary heart disease continues to be debated. Despite public perception of a major role for their effect, scientific opinion on their relevance remains divided. This paper reviews the literature on the influence of social support and life stress on coronary heart disease incidence and mortality. METHODS: Observational studies published in English, based on over 100 human subjects from the general population, investigating life stress or social support were considered. Fourteen studies derived from MEDLINE searches on MeSH headings: coronary disease; stress, psychological; social support; social isolation; life change events. An equivalent search of BIDS and studies referenced by papers identified using these sources was carried out. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The review concludes that both life stress and social support were found to have an influence on coronary heart disease, social support more so than stress. Both have a stronger influence on coronary heart disease mortality than on initial incidence of clinical disease. Measures of the quality of support, in particular emotion support, show the largest effects. The review highlights problems in drawing conclusions from the available literature; in particular, the inconsistency in measures used to define the psychosocial factors. Further studies are needed to investigate interrelationships between stress and social support, and a recommendation is made to adopt pragmatic measures in future studies, which if proven to have an effect, may be open to modification.
Authors: Erica M S Sibinga; Deanna Kerrigan; Miriam Stewart; Kelly Johnson; Trish Magyari; Jonathan M Ellen Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2011-02-25 Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Abiola Keller; Kristin Litzelman; Lauren E Wisk; Torsheika Maddox; Erika Rose Cheng; Paul D Creswell; Whitney P Witt Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2011-12-26 Impact factor: 4.267