Gender differences in self-care maintenance and its associations among patients with chronic heart failure

Abstract

Objectives To identify the gender differences in self-care maintenance and its associations among chronic heart failure patients using the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills model. Methods Two hundred and ten patients (54.0% female) with chronic heart failure participated in this cross-sectional study. Self-care, knowledge of heart failure, social support and illness perception were measured using the Self-Care of Heart Failure Index, the questionnaire of heart failure knowledge, the Perceived Social Support Scale, and the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire, respectively. Results Mean scores for self-care maintenance were 51.4 ± 14.8 in men and 55.6 ± 14.1 in women ( t = −2.066, P < 0.05). Associated factors of self-care maintenance were social support and self-care confidence in men and the knowledge of heart failure, self-care management and self-care confidence in women. The relationship between social support and self-care maintenance was meditated by self-care confidence in men, whereas the relationship between knowledge of heart failure and self-care maintenance was meditated by self-care management and self-care confidence in women. Conclusions Self-care maintenance were inadequate in both genders with chronic heart failure. Interventions for enhancing social support and self-care confidence in men patients, and strengthening knowledge of heart failure, self-care management and self-care confidence in women patients, may facilitate self-care maintenance.

Factors Affecting Health-Promoting Behaviors in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

“…Women adhered more strictly to good dietary habits compared to men. This finding is consistent with those of previous studies [ 48 , 49 ], which revealed that women had better adherence to health-promoting behaviors than men. Traditionally, shopping for ingredients and preparing meals is a domestic role for women [ 50 ], so women are more responsible for cooking and preparing meals.…”

Psychometric Validation of the Living with Chronic Illness Scale in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure

“…Finally, the results regarding known-groups validity showed that the LW-CI-HF scale discriminates depending on marital status, employment situation or the severity of HF according to the NYHA classification and PGIS [ 48 , 49 , 50 ]. We know that HF produces a considerable disruption in patients’ marital and working lives, and these variables are important determinants of clinical outcomes in HF [ 48 , 50 ].…”

“…Internal validity, defined as the intercorrelations between the LW-CI-HF scale dimensions (standard, r s = 0.3−0.7) [ 36 , 38 ] was also tested. Known-group validity of the LW-CI-HF scale was analysed in the sample grouped by sociodemographic data, functional classification according to the NYHA classification and PGIS scores [ 48 , 49 , 50 ]. Hypotheses related to significant differences in LW-CI-HF scores by gender, marital status, employment situation, NYHA classification and PGIS levels were set, following the literature [ 49 , 51 ].…”

“…Known-group validity of the LW-CI-HF scale was analysed in the sample grouped by sociodemographic data, functional classification according to the NYHA classification and PGIS scores [ 48 , 49 , 50 ]. Hypotheses related to significant differences in LW-CI-HF scores by gender, marital status, employment situation, NYHA classification and PGIS levels were set, following the literature [ 49 , 51 ]. We chose the variables for grouping the patients based on our previous research on the construct “living with chronic disease” and on the knowledge about the determinants of clinical outcomes in patients with HF [ 49 ].…”

“…Hypotheses related to significant differences in LW-CI-HF scores by gender, marital status, employment situation, NYHA classification and PGIS levels were set, following the literature [ 49 , 51 ]. We chose the variables for grouping the patients based on our previous research on the construct “living with chronic disease” and on the knowledge about the determinants of clinical outcomes in patients with HF [ 49 ]. For group comparison, we used the Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis statistics tests with Bonferroni post hoc test correction.…”