This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by O'Hara, L. Articles by Ide, L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by O'Hara, L. Articles by Ide, L. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Evaluation of the effectiveness of professionally guided self-care for people with multiple sclerosis living in the community: A randomized controlled trial

Research Group, NFER-Nelson, Windsor, UK

Heather Cadbury

Lorraine De Souza

Lorely Ide

Centre for Research in Rehabilitation, Department of Health Studies, Brunel University, London, UK

Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the ef"cacy of a patient-focused professionally guided self-care programme for the management of multiple sclerosis (MS) in the community.

Design: This was a single-blind randomized controlled trial.

Setting: The study was conducted with people with MS living in the community.

Participants: Two hundred and seventy-eight people with MS were invited to take part in the study. One hundred and eighty-nine people consented to take part (68%). Of these 183 began the study and 169 (92.3%) completed it. Seventy-three individuals were in the intervention group and 96 were in the control group.

Intervention: The intervention comprised discussion of self-care based on client priorities, using an information booklet about self-care.

Main outcome measures: These included the Barthel Index, a measure of mobility, the SF-36, and the Standard Day Dependency Record (SDDR) which measures the need for assistance with daily activities. Assessments were conducted at baseline and again six months later.

Results: Changes in health status were small. However, at follow-up the intervention group had better SF-36 health scores, in mental health (p = 0.04), and vitality (p = 0.05) and considered help with daily activities to be less essential, as measured by the SDDR (p = 0.04), than the control group. Participants in the intervention group had maintained levels of independence at follow-up (p = 0.62) while the control group showed a signi"cant decrease in independence (p = 0.001).

Conclusion: This intervention could be a useful aid for health professionals who are supporting people with MS living in the community.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Kos, E. Kerckhofs, G. Nagels, M.B. D'hooghe, and S. Ilsbroukx Origin of Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis: Review of the Literature Neurorehabil Neural Repair, February 1, 2008; 22(1): 91 - 100. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Kos, M. Duportail, M. D'hooghe, G. Nagels, and E. Kerckhofs Multidisciplinary fatigue management programme in multiple sclerosis: a randomized clinical trial Multiple Sclerosis, September 1, 2007; 13(8): 996 - 1003. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C D Ward, G Turpin, M E Dewey, S Fleming, B Hurwitz, S Ratib, M von Fragstein, and M Lymbery Education for people with progressive neurological conditions can have negative effects: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial Clinical Rehabilitation, July 1, 2004; 18(7): 717 - 725. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Gibson and A. Frank Supporting individuals with disabling multiple sclerosis J R Soc Med, January 12, 2002; 95(12): 580 - 586. [Full Text] [PDF]