Part one of the discussions shed light on some of the participants’
unmet needs following a cardiac event. The findings
showed that few expressed needs could be satisfied on an
environmental level since participants felt that they were the
ones best suited to take action that could be beneficial to them.
The focus of improvement was thus placed on a personal level.
Participants also viewed group discussions similar to the focus
group sessions as a potential solution to stress management.
Second part of the discussion: planning support
The specific questions asked to participants during the second
part of the discussions are reported in Table 1, together with
practical details that should be considered when planning
support group interventions. Subjects discussed included
participants’ interest in rehabilitation programmes, whether
group support should be offered to patients only and
caregivers, and if individual meetings should also be considered.
Frequency of meetings, the delay after hospital discharge
and other points, such as travel considerations, were
also discussed. In addition, details like parking fees and
walking distance should not be neglected.
We devised a model based on the findings as the basis for the
development of cardiac rehabilitation programmes, and this
is shown in Figure 1.
Table 1 Points to consider when implementing support groups as part of rehabilitation programmes: patients’ perspectives
If a rehabilitation program was offered:* Points to consider
1. Would you be interested? Cardiac participants are highly in favour of rehabilitation programmes centred on support groups.
Principle reasons given are: a sense of security, helpful for stress management, getting more
information and answers to questions from competent individuals. Only one participant showed
no interest since she had undergone many surgeries, felt old and was discouraged.
2. Would you prefer
(a) Group meetings including:
Cardiac individuals only? Popular because they allow discussion about participant’s experience.
Cardiac individuals and caregivers? From the cardiac individual’s point of view, meetings with spouses are essential to allow the latter to better understand them.
Caregivers only? Cardiac participants felt that caregivers also need support.
(b) Individual meetings? Meetings favouring discussion in smaller groups including the cardiac patient, his/her caregiver and a professional, are suggested to discuss more delicate matters such as sex. Also useful for people with hearing disabilities or those who are still working.
3. Would transportation be a problem? Transportation is often a problem. Many people, especially caregivers (usually women) do not drive and people with a recent cardiac event have restrictions. However, people can find help or willing to help each other for transport. Travelling during the winter and/or at night is more
difficult. Parking is also a problem. Specific issues discussed were walking distance and
4. At what frequency would you wish the meetings to be?
Not more than one meeting per week.
5. How long after hospital discharge A delay of 1–3 months after hospital discharge is usually suggested. The ideal moment to begin group sessions varies from one person to another.
6. Do you have any other suggestions? Meetings are more difficult to organize if participants are still working.
*Specific questions asked during the second part of the discussions were developed after analysis of the data generated during the first part of the discussions.
- 1 decade agoFavorite Answer
表格1 點當實現支持組作為恢復計畫的部分時考慮︰ patients 遠景
僅心臟的個人嗎？ 他們允許大約participant s 經驗的討論受歡迎。
心臟的個人和照料者嗎？ 從心臟individual s 觀點，與配偶會晤對很重要允許后者更好理解他們。
(b)個別的會議嗎？ 三五成群包括心臟的病患，他的/她的照料者和一名專業人士的支持討論的會議，被建議討論象性那樣的更精美的事情。 此外對加聽說生理殘障或者仍然是工作的的那些人的人有用。
3.運輸將是一個問題嗎？ 運輸經常是一個問題。 很多人，特別是照料者(通常是婦女)不駕駛，有一次新近的心臟的事件的人有限制。 不過，人們能發現幫助或者願意為運輸互相幫助。 在冬天和/或在夜裡旅行更多
難。 停放也是一個問題。 討論的具體的問題是步履可及的範圍和
5.醫院卸怎樣月醫院卸的一1 V3的延遲通常被建議。 開始集體會議的理想的時刻從一個人變化到另一個。
*在數據的分析在討論的第一部分期間產生之后，在討論的第2 個部分期間問的具體的問題被發展。Source(s): me