In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.


The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to ACNAP Silver Members, Fellows of the ESC and Young combined Members

Patients' experience of risk communication after acute myocardial infarction: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

Session Oral abstract session: PPCI , risk factors and prevention

Speaker Stefanie Mentrup

Congress : EuroHeartCare 2018

  • Topic : cardiovascular nursing and allied professions
  • Sub-topic : Chronic Nursing Care
  • Session type : Abstract Session
  • FP Number : 240

Authors : S Mentrup (Lübeck,DE), T Gomersall (Huddersfield,GB), P Holdich (Leeds,GB), S Koepke (Lübeck,DE), F Astin (Huddersfield,GB)

Authors:
S Mentrup1 , T Gomersall2 , P Holdich3 , S Koepke1 , F Astin4 , 1University of Lübeck, Institute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Nursing Research Group - Lübeck - Germany , 2University of Huddersfield, Department of Psychology - Huddersfield - United Kingdom , 3Leeds Beckett University, School of Health and Community Studies - Leeds - United Kingdom , 4University of Huddersfield and Research and Development, Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Trust, Centre for Applied Research in Health - Huddersfield - United Kingdom ,

Citation:
European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing ( 2017 ) 17 ( Supplement ), S67

Background: People with established coronary heart disease (CHD) and a history of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have a high risk for further cardiac events. Effective communication about patients’ individual risk is a prerequisite for successful secondary prevention and CHD self-management. In this review we examine how patients experience the delivery of information and communication about CHD risk.
Purpose: To synthesize findings of qualitative studies about patients’ individual experiences of risk communication on secondary prevention after myocardial infarction.
Methods: The qualitative synthesis was conducted using a meta-ethnography (Noblit and Hare); an approach widely used to provide robust evidence on patient beliefs and experiences. A pre-planned search was piloted and implemented across 5 databases (the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE via PubMed; PsycINFO; CINAHL; SSCI) between January 1996 and October 2016. Inclusion criteria were; studies with qualitative or mixed methods design, recruiting participants with established CHD and a history of AMI, reporting findings with at least one category/theme about risk communication. Studies were independently assessed for inclusion by two researchers and a quality appraisal conducted.
Results: Of 2148 initial hits, 41 full-text papers were included, describing the experiences of over 850 participants. Six characteristics of risk information were valued by participants; consistency, individualisation, appropriate levels of detail, timing, location and modality (ie. how information was presented e.g. verbal, written, or pictorial format). Participants’ experiences of using the risk information were characterised by two overarching themes. Converting to context highlighted the complex ways in which participants applied their knowledge of risk within their everyday lives – often adapting self-management recommendations to pre-existing preferences and habits. Dialogue with the self, on the other hand, showed how participants continued to try and make sense of their ongoing coronary risk, and in particular the controllability of their illness, long after communication with clinicians.
Conclusions: Understanding risk after AMI is a long-term process characterised by an internal dialogue in which patients translate the information from health professionals into their unique life situation. Clinicians need to follow up patients in the longer term to support patient learning and help them to manage their coronary risk with attention to everyday life context. Patients valued consistent, timely risk communication (ie. not necessarily in the immediate aftermath of AMI) delivered in a way that made sense to them.

The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to ACNAP Silver Members, Fellows of the ESC and Young combined Members



Based on your interests

Members get more

Join now
  • 1ESC Professional Members – access all resources from ESC Congress and ESC Asia with APSC & AFC
  • 2ESC Association Members (Ivory, Silver, Gold) – access your Association’s congress resources
  • 3Under 40 or in training - with a Combined Membership, access resources from all congresses
Join now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are