LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,113
تعداد مقالات10,208
تعداد مشاهده مقاله40,770,525
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله8,800,264
Dehghani, Ali. (1399). A Comparative Study of the Effect of Peer-led and Lecture-based Education on Health Literacy in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 9(1), 76-85. doi: 10.30476/ijcbnm.2020.85816.1298
Ali Dehghani. "A Comparative Study of the Effect of Peer-led and Lecture-based Education on Health Literacy in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 9, 1, 1399, 76-85. doi: 10.30476/ijcbnm.2020.85816.1298
Dehghani, Ali. (1399). 'A Comparative Study of the Effect of Peer-led and Lecture-based Education on Health Literacy in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 9(1), pp. 76-85. doi: 10.30476/ijcbnm.2020.85816.1298
Dehghani, Ali. A Comparative Study of the Effect of Peer-led and Lecture-based Education on Health Literacy in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1399; 9(1): 76-85. doi: 10.30476/ijcbnm.2020.85816.1298

A Comparative Study of the Effect of Peer-led and Lecture-based Education on Health Literacy in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

International Journal of Community Based Nursing & Midwifery
مقاله 7، دوره 9، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 33، فروردین 2021، صفحه 76-85    اصل مقاله (394.56 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/ijcbnm.2020.85816.1298
نویسنده
Ali Dehghani*
Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Paramedical, Jahrom University of Medical Sciences, Jahrom, Iran
چکیده
Background: Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) require health literacy to manage the symptoms and problems of the disease, which improves their quality of life. Health literacy is recognized as a critical indicator of health care outcomes. This study aimed to compare the effect of peer-led and lecture-based education on health literacy in MS patients.
Methods: This quasi-experimental study was conducted on MS patients in Jahrom from December 2018 to November 2019. 90 patients were selected using convenience sampling and then assigned into control (n=45) and intervention groups (n=45). While routine education was presented to patients in the control group, peer education intervention was held for the intervention group. The number of sessions held for both groups was six sessions (one session per week). For data collection, MS health literacy questionnaire (MSHLQ) was used before and one month after the intervention in both groups. Data were analyzed through SPSS version 21 using Chi-square, Fisher’s exact test and t-test. The significance level was considered P<0.05.
Results: Paired t-test showed that there was a significant difference between the mean of health literacy in the intervention group before and after the intervention (P=0.001), while this difference was not observed in the control group (P=0.39). Independent t-test showed a significant difference in the mean of health literacy between the intervention and control groups after the intervention (P=0.001).
Conclusion: The results showed that peer group experiences were more effective than lecture-based education in improving health literacy. It can be beneficial to employ as an educative-supportive approach in MS patients.
 
کلیدواژه‌ها
Education؛ Health literacy؛ Lecture؛ Multiple sclerosis؛ Peer group
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
مراجع
  1. Lassmann H, Bradl M. Multiple sclerosis: experimental models and reality. Acta Neuropathologica. 2017;133:223-44.
  2. Lassmann H. Multiple Sclerosis Pathology. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine. 2018;8:028936.
  3. Ontaneda D, Thompson AJ, Fox RJ, Cohen JA. Progressive multiple sclerosis: prospects for disease therapy, repair, and restoration of function. The Lancet. 2017;389:1357-66.
  4. Koch-Henriksen N, Sørensen PS. The changing demographic pattern of multiple sclerosis epidemiology. The Lancet Neurology. 2010;9:520–32.
  5. Etemadifar M, Izadi S, Nikseresht A, et al. Estimated prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in Iran. European Neurology. 2014;72:370–4.
  6. Eskandarieh S, Heydarpour P, Elhami SR, Sahraian MA. Prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in Tehran, Iran. Iranian Journal of Public Health. 2017;46:699-704.
  7. Dehghani A, Keshavarzi A. Development and validation of a multidimensional health literacy questionnaire for multiple sclerosis patients. Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders. 2018;25:156-62.
  8. Dehghani A, Dehghan Nayeri N, Ebadi A. Antecedents of coping with the disease in patients with multiple sclerosis: a qualitative content analysis. International Journal of Community Based Nursing and Midwifery. 2017;5:49-60.
  9. Koutsogeorgou E, Chiesi AM, Leonardi M. Social capital components and social support of persons with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2018. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2019. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2019.1597182 [online]
  10. Wendebourg MJ, Heesen C, Finlayson M, et al. Patient education for people with multiple sclerosis-associated fatigue: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0173025.
  11. World Health Organization. Health Promotion Glossary. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1998.
  12. Taggart J, Williams A, Dennis S, et al. A systematic review of interventions in primary care to improve health literacy for chronic disease behavioral risk factors. BMC Family Practice. 2012;13:49.
  13. Heijmans M, Waverijn G, Rademakers J, et al. Functional, communicative and critical health literacy of chronic disease patients and their importance for self-management. Patient Education and Counseling. 2015;98:41-8.
  14. Poureslami I, Nimmon L, Rootman I, Fitzgerald MJ. Health literacy and chronic disease management: drawing from expert knowledge to set an agenda. Health Promotion International. 2017;32:743-54.
  15. Rafferty AP, Luo H, Little NR, et al. Self-reported Health Literacy among North Carolina Adults and Associations with Health Status and Chronic Health Conditions. North Carolina Medical Journal. 2020;81:87-94.
  16. Brooks C, Ballinger C, Nutbeam D, et al. Nursing and allied health professionals’ views about using health literacy screening tools and a universal precautions approach to communication with older adults: a qualitative study. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2020;42:1819-25.
  17. Nyumba TO, Wilson K, Derrick CJ, Mukherjee N. The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 2018;9:20-32.
  18. Hayes SM, Sharief M, Ng P. Identification of clinician challenges in order to drive the development of competency-based education: results from an international needs assessment in multiple sclerosis. Journal of European CME. 2015;4(1).
  19. Winarti Y, Ernawati R. Effectiveness of Peer Education Method in Increasing Knowledge and Attitude towards HIV/AIDS Prevention among Students in Samarinda. Indonesian Journal of Nursing Practices. 2019;3:105-10.
  20. Varaei S, Shamsizadeh M, Cheraghi MA, et al. Effects of a peer education on cardiac self‐efficacy and readmissions in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized‐controlled trial. Nursing in Critical Care. 2017;22:19-28.
  21. Druss BG, Singh M, von Esenwein SA, et al. Peer-led self-management of general medical conditions for patients with serious mental illnesses: A randomized trial. Psychiatric Services. 2018;69:529-35.
  22. Sharif F, Abshorshori N, Tahmasebi S, et al. The effect of peer-led education on the life quality of mastectomy patients referred to breast cancer-clinics in Shiraz, Iran 2009. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2010;8:74.
  23. Walpola RL, McLachlan AJ, Chen TF. A scoping review of peer-led education in patient safety training. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2018;82:6110.
  24. Bovis F, Signori A, Carmisciano L, et al. Expanded disability status scale progression assessment heterogeneity in multiple sclerosis according to geographical areas. Annals of Neurology. 2018;84:621-5.
  25. Hejazi S, Peyman N, Tajfard M, Esmaily H. The impact of education based on self-efficacy theory on health literacy, self-efficacy and self-care behaviors in patients with type 2 diabetes. Iranian Journal of Health Education and Health Promotion. 2017;5:296-303. [In Persian].
  26. Doull M, O’Connor AM, Welch V, et al. Peer support strategies for improving the health and well‐being of individuals with chronic diseases. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017;2017(6).
  27. Loman K, Nickens N, Tye N, et al. Peer coach during field experiences: cultivating teacher candidates’ peer feedback and reflective practices. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education. 2020;41:85-99.
  28. Mohammadpoor Hodki R, Rahnama M, Abdollahimohammad A, et al. A comparison of the effect of training by peers and nurses on anxiety in patients with myocardial infarction: a randomized control trial. Preventive Care in Nursing and Midwifery Journal. 2016;6:12–23. [In Persian]
  29. Borzou R, Bayat Z, Salvati M, et al. A comparison of Individual and Peer Educational Methods on Quality of life in patients with heart failure. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2014;14:767-76. [In Persian]
  30. Mohammadi N, Talarli F, Khodaveisi M, Soltanian A. The effect of peer educational program on the self–efficacy of multiple sclerosis patients: a randomized controlled trial. Avicenna Journal of Nursing & Midwifery Care. 2017;25:36–44. [In Persian]
  31. Hibbard J. Patient activation and health literacy: What’s the difference? How do each contribute to health outcomes. Studies in Health Technology Informatics. 2017;240:251-62.
  32. Bayati T, Dehghan A, Bonyadi F, Bazrafkan L. Investigating the effect of education on health literacy and its relation to health-promoting behaviors in health center. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2018;7:127.
  33. Schulz PJ, Nakamoto K. Health literacy and patient empowerment in health communication: the importance of separating conjoined twins. Patient Education and Counseling. 2013;90:4-11.
  34. Kandula NR, Nsiah-Kumi PA, Makoul G, et al. The relationship between health literacy and knowledge improvement after a multimedia type 2 diabetes education program. Patient Education and Counseling. 2009;75:321–7.
  35. Fisher EB, Boothroyd RI, Coufal MM, et al. Peer support for self-management of diabetes improved outcomes in international settings. Health Affairs. 2012;31:130-9.
  36. Kaya T, Goksel Karatepe A, Atici Ozturk P, Gunaydin R. Impact of peer‐led group education on the quality of life in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases. 2016;19:184-91.
  37. Asadollahi M, Namdar H, Arzani A, et al. Comparing the effect of nurse-led and peer-led training on stress of mothers of children with chronic diseases. Nursing and Midwifery Studies. 2017;6:103-8.
  38. Azizi M, Zarei B, Rahimi H, et al. Comparison of the Effects of Peer-led and Nurse-led Self-management Programs on Self-management of Patients with Multiple Sclerosis. Scientific Journal of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedical Faculty. 2020;6:58-71.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,370
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,707


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب