Development and feasibility of the Help to Overcome Problems Effectively (HOPE) self-management intervention for people living with multiple sclerosis.
Anderson, Joanna K
Disability and Rehabilitation
Taylor & Francis
MetadataShow full item record
Anderson, J. K., Turner, A., & Clyne, W. (2017). Development and feasibility of the Help to Overcome Problems Effectively (HOPE) self-management intervention for people living with multiple sclerosis.. Disability and Rehabilitation, 39 (11), 1114-1121. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1181211
PURPOSE: To describe the development and feasibility of a self-management intervention called the Help to Overcome Problems Effectively (HOPE: MS), aimed at improving the physical and psychological wellbeing of people living with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). METHOD: HOPE: MS is an innovative, 6-week group-based, manualised self-management intervention combining positive psychology theory and practice, and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). Participants (N = 21) recruited via a local East Midlands branch of the MS Society attended one of three HOPE: MS interventions and completed self-reported outcome measures in week 1 and week 6. The following outcome measures were used: The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale; Multiple Sclerosis Fatigue Severity Scale; The Multiple Sclerosis Self-Efficacy Scale; The Adult State Hope Scale; The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; The Positive and Negative Affect Scale. RESULTS: Post-intervention (6 weeks) mean scores decreased in the physical impact (baseline M = 65.6, SD = 17.4; 6 weeks M = 55.1, SD = 17.9, 95% CI [-4.39, -16.47] and the psychological impact of MS (baseline M = 24.0, SD = 7.3; 6 weeks M = 18.9; SD = 6.3, 95% CI [-2.54, -7.66]). There was also a decrease mean fatigue severity scores (baseline 49.4, SD = 13.3, 6 weeks M = 41.1, SD = 14.4, 95% CI [-2.65, -13.44]). There was a mean decrease in depression scores (baseline M = 6.9, SD = 3.5; 6 weeks M = 4.2, SD = 2.8, 95% CI [-1.43, -4.00]). There were smaller mean decreases in anxiety (baseline M = 7.6, SD = 3.4; 6 weeks M = 6.7 (4.0), 95% CI [0.69, -2.50]) and negative affect (baseline M = 22.9, SD = 6.8; 6 weeks M = 20.8 (8.1), 95% CI [0.69, -2.50]) refer Table 3 ). Mean MS self-efficacy scores (baseline 21.7, SD = 4.2; 6 weeks M = 24.1, SD = 4.7, 95% CI [0.23, 4.53]), mean total hope scores (baseline M = 23.3, SD = 10.7; 6 weeks M = 32.2 (10.6), 95% CI [4.91, 12.9]), hope agency scores (baseline M = 10.5, SD = 5.7; 6 weeks M = 15.7 (6.2), 95% CI [2.37, 8.01]), hope pathways (baseline M = 12.9, SD = 6.0; 6 weeks M = 16.6 (4.9), 95% CI [2.00, 5.43]) and positive affect scores increased (baseline M = 27.3, SD = 7.1; 6 months M = 32.2, SD = 8.4, 95% CI [0.42, 9.39]). Participants positively rated the intervention quality and delivery. CONCLUSIONS: This feasibility study showed that the HOPE: MS was acceptable and useful to people living with MS. Further robust evaluations using a randomised controlled trial design with longer follow ups are needed to confirm early promising results of the HOPE: MS. Implications for rehabilitation Living with MS requires constant adjustments to cope with unpredictable symptoms. Self-management interventions have the potential to help people living with MS to improve their quality of life. A feasibility study of the HOPE: MS self-management group-based intervention showed that it was acceptable and useful to people living with MS.
Hope, multiple sclerosis, quality of life, self-management, Adult, Aged, Cognitive Therapy, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Program Development, Self Care
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1181211
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/255840