Letter to the EditorSelf-management: One size does not fit all
Section snippets
Self-management: is it effective?
Over the past decade many self-management programs were developed and their efficacy studied. Several meta-analyses have been conducted in different chronic conditions, indicating large variance in both quantity and methodological quality of included self-management trials. Table 1 illustrates the pooled evidence indicating that self-management in patients with asthma [12], chronic heart failure [13], COPD [14], diabetes mellitus type-2 (DM-II) [15], hypertension [17], musculoskeletal pain [18]
Self-management: what works best?
Several meta-analyses have attempted to evaluate possible shifts in effect size for different program characteristics but were largely unrevealing [13], [15], [17], [26]. However, in patients with COPD [14] and asthma [12] the addition of action plans for self-treatment of exacerbations seems to result in larger reductions in healthcare utilization. In DM-II, improvements in glycaemic control seem more pronounced when psychosocial behavioral techniques are used [27]. The addition of
One size does not fit all: urge for tailored interventions
A self-management program is not equal to prescribing patients a drug but instead a classic example of a ‘complex intervention’ – a treatment strategy containing several interacting components and varying dimensions of complexity (i.e. variability in delivery, organizational levels, outcomes, etc.) [28]. When applied in subtly different target populations or healthcare settings these interventions can produce substantially variable results. Although one might conclude that on average
Conclusion and future directions
Self-management for people with chronic diseases is now widely recognized as an essential part of treatment. Despite the high expectations and the growing body of evidence in terms of its effectiveness, a wide application of self-management programs is inhibited due to several challenges. Meta-analytic findings indicate that self-management has added value in only a selection of outcome measures and these reports demonstrate a large variance in effect size both between studies and target
References (29)
- et al.
Self-management approaches for people with chronic conditions: a review
Patient Educ Couns
(2002) - et al.
Self-management interventions for chronic illness
Lancet
(2004) - et al.
Self-management and behaviour modification in COPD
Patient Educ Couns
(2004) - et al.
Self-management programs for chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Patient Educ Couns
(2011) - et al.
Improvements in HbA1c remain after 5 years – a follow up of an educational intervention focusing on patients’ personal understandings of type 2 diabetes
Diabetes Res Clin Pract
(2008) - et al.
Mediating the effect of self-care management intervention in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of 47 randomised controlled trials
Patient Educ Couns
(2010) - et al.
Global health risks: mortality and burden of disease attributable to selected major risks
(2009) - et al.
Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030
PLoS Med
(2006) Chronic disease management: what will it take to improve care for chronic illness?
Eff Clin Pract
(1998)- et al.
Self-management education: history, definition, outcomes, and mechanisms
Ann Behav Med
(2003)
Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness
J Amer Med Assoc
Organizing care for patients with chronic illness
Milbank Q
How should we define health?
Brit Med J
The 1st annual crossing the quality chasm summit: A focus on communities
Cited by (117)
The Effect of a web-based physical activity intervention on COPD knowledge: A secondary cohort study
2021, Respiratory MedicineFactors associated with patient activation in a socially deprived population: Evidence from Germany
2021, Patient Education and CounselingCitation Excerpt :However, the question of the relative importance of different factors in explaining patient activation has not been investigated so far. Although a wide range of interventions to enhance patient activation have been developed for various populations, a substantial proportion of these interventions failed because their design followed a “one size fits all approach” without taking sufficiently into account what different patient groups need to adhere and succeed [20,68]. Furthermore, for scarce health care resources to be allocated more effectively, it is critical to know which determinants should be the focus of interventions or educational programs designed to increase patient activation.
‘Towards a conceptualization of nurses’ support of hospitalised patients' self-management—A modified Delphi study’
2024, Journal of Clinical NursingEffects of Self-Management Interventions in People With Interstitial Lung Disease
2024, Respiratory Care