Volume 18, Issue 2 p. 195-203
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Outcomes in patient education programmes for people with rheumatic diseases: Results from a Delphi process and a study of feasibility and responsiveness

Renate Røe

Corresponding Author

Renate Røe

National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway

Correspondence

Renate Røe, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Pb. 23 Vinderen 0319, Oslo, Norway.

Email: renate.roe@diakonsyk.no

Search for more papers by this author
Kjersti Grønning

Kjersti Grønning

Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
Liv Rognerud Eriksson

Liv Rognerud Eriksson

Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
Heidi A. Zangi

Heidi A. Zangi

National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway

Faculty of Health, VID Specialized University, Oslo, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 28 January 2020
Citations: 1

Abstract

Background

Patient education (PE) is recommended as an integral part of disease management for people with chronic inflammatory arthritis (IA). There is no consensus on how PE should be evaluated and which outcome measures should be used.

Objectives

This study had three aims: (a) to identify core aspects that PE for patients with IA may impact on; (b) to identify outcome measures to assess changes in these aspects; (c) to test the feasibility and responsiveness of the identified outcome measures.

Methods

A Delphi process was conducted to identify core aspects and outcome measures. Feasibility and responsiveness were tested in a pre-/post-test study with 3 months follow-up, including 104 patients attending PE programmes.

Results

Seven core aspects were identified: communication with health professionals, coping strategies, empowerment, knowledge about healthy life style, self-efficacy, understanding disease and treatment, and sharing experiences. Four outcome measures were identified; Arthritis Self Efficacy Scale (ASES-11), Effective Consumer scale (EC-17), Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ) and Patient Activation Measure (PAM). At baseline, all measures had low rates of missing data. All measures except two heiQ subscales exhibited ceiling effects. Internal consistency was acceptable. At follow-up, statistically significant, but small improvements were found in EC-17 and three heiQ subscales.

Conclusion

ASES and EC-17 were found to be the most valid and feasible outcome measures to evaluate the identified core aspects of PE and can be recommended as outcome measures to assess PE programmes for patients with IA.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.