The self-care for people initiative: the outcome evaluation.

7Citations
Citations of this article
72Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

To determine the effects of a community-based training programme in self-care on the lay population. Self Care is recognised as being a cornerstone of the populations health, but to date there have been few large-scale studies of its effectiveness on the general public. This paper reports on an evaluation of a self-care skills training course delivered in small group sessions within workplace and parent and toddler group settings to a lay population. A quasi-experimental longitudinal study of 12-month duration was conducted in three intervention primary care trusts (PCTs) and two similar comparison PCTs in England. The sample comprised 1568 self-selecting participants: 868 received the intervention and 700 did not. No changes were seen in usage of General Practitioner services, the primary outcome, however, statistical analysis suggested that being in the intervention group may be associated with increased use of out-of-hours and secondary care services. At six months' follow-up small but statistically significant positive effects of being in the intervention group were seen on self-esteem, well-being and anxiety scores. At 12 months' follow-up small but statistically significant positive effects of being in the intervention group were also seen on recovery locus of control, health literacy and self-esteem scores, and on knowledge of adult cough. The clinical significance of these very small changes is unclear. The training programme had a small but positive effect, which was still evident at 12 months, on individuals' knowledge and confidence levels with regard to managing their own health, but did not lead to reductions in health service use.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

White, A., South, J., Bagnall, A. M., Forshaw, M., Spoor, C., Marchant, P., & Witty, K. (2012). The self-care for people initiative: the outcome evaluation. Primary Health Care Research & Development, 13(4), 382–394. https://doi.org/10.1017/S146342361200014X

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free