Randomized controlled trial of a lay-facilitated angina management programme

• Published in: Journal of advanced nursing 2012-10, Vol.68 (10), p.2267-2279
• Main Authors: Furze, Gill, Cox, Helen, Morton, Veronica, Chuang, Ling-Hsiang, Lewin, Robert J.P., Nelson, Pauline, Carty, Richard, Norris, Heather, Patel, Nicky, Elton, Peter
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; angina nurses; Angina pectoris; Angina Pectoris - nursing; Angina Pectoris - rehabilitation; cardiac rehabilitation; Clinical trials; Community Health Workers - education; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Disease management; England; Female; Humans; Intervention; lay-led care; Male; Middle Aged; Nurse Clinicians; Nurses; Nursing care; Patient Care Management - economics; Patient Care Management - organization & administration; Prospective Studies; randomized controlled trial; Regression Analysis; Rehabilitation; Research Papers; Self Care; self-management; Single-Blind Method; Social Support; stable angina; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 0309-2402; 1365-2648
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05920.x

furze g., cox h., morton v., chuang l.‐h., lewin r.j.p., nelson p., carty r., norris h., patel n. & elton p. (2012) Randomized controlled trial of a lay‐facilitated angina management programme. Journal of Advanced Nursing68(10), 2267–2279. Aims.  This article reports a randomized controlled trial of lay‐facilitated angina management (registered trial acronym: LAMP). Background.  Previously, a nurse‐facilitated angina programme was shown to reduce angina while increasing physical activity, however most people with angina do not receive a cardiac rehabilitation or self‐management programme. Lay people are increasingly being trained to facilitate self‐management programmes. Design.  A randomized controlled trial comparing a lay‐facilitated angina management programme with routine care from an angina nurse specialist. Methods.  Participants with new stable angina were randomized to the angina management programme (intervention: 70 participants) or advice from an angina nurse specialist (control: 72 participants). Primary outcome was angina frequency at 6 months; secondary outcomes at 3 and 6 months included: risk factors, physical functioning, anxiety, depression, angina misconceptions and cost utility. Follow‐up was complete in March 2009. Analysis was by intention‐to‐treat; blind to group allocation. Results.  There was no important difference in angina frequency at 6 months. Secondary outcomes, assessed by either linear or logistic regression models, demonstrated important differences favouring the intervention group, at 3 months for: Anxiety, angina misconceptions and for exercise report; and at 6 months for: Anxiety; Depression; and angina misconceptions. The intervention was considered cost‐effective. Conclusion.  The angina management programme produced some superior benefits when compared to advice from a specialist nurse.