Back to Search Start Over

Perceived Need for Psychosocial Support After Aortic Dissection: Cross-Sectional Survey.

Authors :
Meinlschmidt, Gunther
Berdajs, Denis
Moser-Starck, Roger
Frick, Alexander
Gross, Sebastian
Schurr, Ulrich
Eckstein, Friedrich S
Hunziker, Sabina
Schaefert, Rainer
Source :
Journal of Participatory Medicine. Jul-Sep2020, Vol. 12 Issue 3, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

Background: The gold standard management of aortic dissection, a life-threatening condition, includes multidisciplinary approaches. Although mental distress following aortic dissection is common, evidence-based psychosocial interventions for aortic dissection survivors are lacking. Objective: The aim of this study is to identify the perceived psychosocial needs of aortic dissection survivors by surveying patients, their relatives, and health professionals to inform the development of such interventions. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional survey and collected responses from 41 participants (27 patients with aortic dissection, 8 relatives of patients with aortic dissection, and 6 health professionals) on key topics, types of interventions, best timing, anticipated success, and the intended effects and side effects of psychosocial interventions after aortic dissection. Results: The principal intervention topics were "changes in everyday life" (28/41, 68%, 95% CI 54.5%-82.9%), "anxiety" (25/41, 61%, 95% CI 46.2%-76.2%), "uncertainty" (24/41, 59%, 95% CI 42.9%-73.2%), "tension/distress" (24/41, 59%, 95% CI 43.9%-73.8%), and "trust in the body" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35.9%-67.5%). The most commonly indicated intervention types were "family/relative therapy" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35%-65.9%) and "anxiety treatment" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35%-67.5%). The most recommended intervention timing was "during inpatient rehabilitation" (26/41, 63%, 95% CI 47.6%-77.5%) followed by "shortly after inpatient rehabilitation" (20/41, 49%, 95% CI 32.4%-65%). More than 95% (39/41) of respondents anticipated a benefit from psychosocial interventions following aortic dissection dissection, expecting a probable improvement in 68.6% (95% CI 61.4%-76.2%) of aortic dissection survivors, a worse outcome for 5% (95% CI 2.9%-7.9%), and that 6% (95% CI 1.8%-10.4%) would have negative side effects due to such interventions. Conclusions: Our findings highlight a substantial need for psychosocial interventions in aortic dissection survivors and indicate that such interventions would be a success. They provide a basis for the development and evaluation of interventions as part of state-of-the-art aortic dissection management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
21527202
Volume :
12
Issue :
3
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Journal of Participatory Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
146894536
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.2196/15447