Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/27451
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGaldas, Paulen_UK
dc.contributor.authorDarwin, Zoeen_UK
dc.contributor.authorFell, Jenniferen_UK
dc.contributor.authorKidd, Lisaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBower, Peteren_UK
dc.contributor.authorBlickem, Christianen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMcPherson, Kerrien_UK
dc.contributor.authorHunt, Kateen_UK
dc.contributor.authorGilbody, Simonen_UK
dc.contributor.authorRichardson, Gerryen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-29T00:03:24Z-
dc.date.available2018-06-29T00:03:24Z-
dc.date.issued2015-06-08en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/27451-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Self-management support interventions can improve health outcomes, but their impact is limited by the numbers of patients able or willing to access them. Men’s attendance at, and engagement with, self-management support appears suboptimal despite their increased risk of developing serious and disabling long-term conditions (LTCs). Objectives: To assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, accessibility and acceptability of self-management support interventions in men with LTCs. Methods: A quantitative systematic review with meta-analysis and a qualitative review using a metaethnography approach. The findings of the two reviews were integrated in parallel synthesis. Data sources: In the quantitative review, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched to identify published reviews of self-management support interventions. Relevant reviews were screened to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of self-management support interventions conducted in men alone, or which analysed the effects of interventions by gender. In the qualitative review, the databases Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, PsycINFO and Social Science Citation Index (July 2013) were searched from inception to July 2013. Review methods: In the quantitative review, data on relevant outcomes, patient populations, intervention type and study quality were extracted. Quality appraisal was conducted independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effects of interventions in male, female and mixed-sex groups. In the metaethnography, study details, participant quotes (first-order constructs) and study authors’ themes/concepts (second-order constructs) were extracted. Quality appraisal was conducted independently by two reviewers using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Data were synthesised according to a metaethnography approach. Third-order interpretations/constructs were derived from the extracted data and integrated to generate a ‘line-of-argument’ synthesis. Results: Forty RCTs of self-management support interventions in male-only samples, and 20 RCTs where an analysis by gender was reported, were included in the quantitative review. Meta-analysis suggested that interventions including physical activity, education and peer support have a positive impact on quality of life in men, and that men may derive more benefit than women from them, but there is currently insufficient evidence to draw definitive conclusions. Thirty-eight qualitative studies relevant to men’s experiences of, and perceptions of, self-management support were included in the qualitative review. The metaethnography identified four concepts: (1) need for purpose; (2) trusted environments; (3) value of peers; and (4) becoming an expert. Findings indicated that men may feel less comfortable engaging in support if it is perceived to be incongruous with valued aspects of masculine identities. Men may find support interventions more attractive when they have a clear purpose, are action-oriented and offer practical strategies that can be integrated into daily life. Support delivered in an environment that offers a sense of shared understanding can be particularly appealing to some men. Conclusions: Health professionals and those involved in designing interventions may wish to consider whether or not certain components (e.g. physical activity, education, peer support) are particularly effective in men, although more research is needed to fully determine and explore this. Interventions are most likely to be accessible and acceptable to men when working with, not against, valued aspects of masculine identities.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherNational Institute for Health Researchen_UK
dc.relationGaldas P, Darwin Z, Fell J, Kidd L, Bower P, Blickem C, McPherson K, Hunt K, Gilbody S & Richardson G (2015) A systematic review and metaethnography to identify how effective, cost-effective, accessible and acceptable self-management support interventions are for men with long-term conditions (SELF-MAN), Perth, Health Services and Delivery Research, 3 (34), pp. 1-302. https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr03340.en_UK
dc.rights© Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2015. This work was produced by Galdas et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.en_UK
dc.titleA systematic review and metaethnography to identify how effective, cost-effective, accessible and acceptable self-management support interventions are for men with long-term conditions (SELF-MAN)en_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.contributor.sponsorNational Institute for Health Researchen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.3310/hsdr03340en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid26312361en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleHealth Services and Delivery Researchen_UK
dc.citation.issn2050-4357en_UK
dc.citation.issn2050-4349en_UK
dc.citation.volume3en_UK
dc.citation.issue34en_UK
dc.citation.spage1en_UK
dc.citation.epage302en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderHealth Services and Delivery Research Programmeen_UK
dc.citation.conferencelocationPerthen_UK
dc.citation.date01/08/2015en_UK
dc.publisher.addressPerthen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Yorken_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Leedsen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Yorken_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationGlasgow Caledonian Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Manchesteren_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Manchesteren_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationGlasgow Caledonian Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Glasgowen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Yorken_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Yorken_UK
dc.identifier.wtid934024en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-5873-3632en_UK
dc.date.firstcompliantdepositdate2018-06-28en_UK
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
NIHR HSDR Self-Man report.pdfFulltext - Published Version4.08 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.