Cited by 38Chronic Disease Management StrategiesDiabetes Management and EducationNursing care and research

A systematic review examining whether community-based self-management programs for older adults with chronic conditions actively engage participants and teach them patient-oriented self-management strategies

Warner, Grace, Packer, Tanya L., Kervin, Emily, Sibbald, Kaitlin, Audulv, Åsa·2019·Patient Education and Counseling

Abstract

Objective To identify whether community-based Self-Management Programs (SMPs) actively engaged, or taught, individuals patient-oriented strategies; and whether having these attributes led to significant differences in outcomes.Methods This systematic review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs)and cluster RCTs reporting on community-based SMPs with a group component for older adults with chronic conditions. The ways SMPS actively engaged participants and whether they taught patient-oriented strategies were analyzed. All study outcomes were reported.Results The 31 included studies demonstrated community-based SMP programs actively engaged participants and provided strategies to improve health behaviour or care of their condition. Few included strategies to help manage the impact of conditions on their everyday lives. Seventy-nine percent of studies reported significant differences; variations in sample sizes and outcomes made it difficult to conclude whether having these attributes led to significant differences.Conclusion SMPs are not supporting older adults to use strategies to address the impact of conditions on their everyday lives, addressing the needs of older adults with multiple conditions, nor assessing outcomes that align with the strategies taught.Practice implications Health-care providers delivering SMPs to older adults need to tailor programs to the needs of older adults and assess whether participants are using strategies being proposed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pec.2019.07.002

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 92 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Warner, G., Packer, T. L., Kervin, E., Sibbald, K., & Audulv, Å.
Affiliations
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • HAN University of Applied Sciences (NL)
  • Mount Saint Vincent University (CA)
  • Mid Sweden University (SE)
Corresponding author
Warner, Grace
Venue
Patient Education and Counseling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-12
Volume
102
Issue
12
Pages
2162-2182
ISSN
0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2954995277
Cited by
38
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation (PSO - KTE - 2009 – 6318)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
Keywords
self-management program, older adults, chronic disease, community-based intervention, participant engagement, health behavior change, multimorbidity, program tailoring
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Aged, Chronic Disease, Community Health Services, Humans, Patient Participation, Quality of Life, Self Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Disease Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review