Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Aug 9;8(1):172.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-022-01141-w.

Peer-mentor support for older vulnerable myocardial infarction patients referred to cardiac rehabilitation: single-arm feasibility study

Affiliations

Peer-mentor support for older vulnerable myocardial infarction patients referred to cardiac rehabilitation: single-arm feasibility study

Maria Pedersen et al. Pilot Feasibility Stud. .

Abstract

Background: The positive effects of cardiac rehabilitation are well established. However, it has an inherent challenge, namely the low attendance rate among older vulnerable patients, which illustrates the need for effective interventions. Peer mentoring is a low-cost intervention that has the potential to improve cardiac rehabilitation attendance and improve physical and psychological outcomes among older patients. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a peer-mentor intervention among older vulnerable myocardial infarction patients referred to cardiac rehabilitation.

Methods: The study was conducted as a single-arm feasibility study and designed as a mixed methods intervention study. Patients admitted to a university hospital in Denmark between September 2020 and December 2020 received a 24-week peer-mentor intervention. The feasibility of the intervention was evaluated based on five criteria by Orsmond and Cohn: (a) recruitment capability, (b) data-collection procedures, (c) intervention acceptability, (d) available resources, and (e) participant responses to the intervention. Data were collected through self-administrated questionnaires, closed-ended telephone interviews, semi-structured interviews, and document sheets.

Results: Twenty patients were offered the peer-mentor intervention. The intervention proved feasible, with a low dropout rate and high acceptability. However, the original inclusion criteria only involved vulnerable women, and this proved not to be feasible, and were therefore revised to also include vulnerable male patients. Peer mentors (n = 17) were monitored during the intervention period, and the findings indicate that their mentoring role did not cause any harm. The peer-mentor intervention showed signs of effectiveness, as a high rate of cardiac rehabilitation attendance was achieved among patients. Quality of life also increased among patients. This was the case for emotional, physical, and global quality of life measures at 24-week follow-up.

Conclusion: The peer-mentor intervention is a feasible and acceptable intervention that holds the potential to increase both cardiac rehabilitation attendance and quality of life in older vulnerable patients. This finding paves the way for peer-mentor interventions to be tested in randomized controlled trials, with a view toward reducing inequality in cardiac rehabilitation attendance. However, some of the original study procedures were not feasible, and as such was revised.

Trial registration: The feasibility study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( ClinicalTrials.gov identification number: NCT04507529 ), August 11, 2020.

Keywords: Cardiothoracic nursing; Coronary heart disease; Inequalities in health; Lifestyle; Mentors; Patient participation; Patient perspectives; Quality of life; Rehabilitation; Self-efficacy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Feasibility study outcomes. Overview of feasibility methods and outcomes, guided by Orsmond and Cohns (2015). The distinctive features of a feasibility study: objectives and guiding questions
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Data-collection time points. Overview of data collected at baseline (T0), 12 weeks (T1), 14–17 weeks (time between T1 and T2), and 24 weeks (T2)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Example of theme development. Illustration of how overarching themes were developed from themes, subthemes, and examples of patient quotes
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Flowchart of inclusion mentees. Flowchart of eligible mentees, number included, dropout (number and reasons), and number completed at 12- and 24-week follow-up
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Flowchart of inclusion peer mentors. Flowchart of eligible peer mentors, number included, dropout (number and reasons), and number completing peer-mentor training

References

    1. Anderson L, Thompson DR, Oldridge N, Zwisler AD, Rees K, Martin N, et al. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;1:CD001800. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schopfer DW, Forman DE. Cardiac rehabilitation in older adults. Can J Cardiol. 2016;32(9):1088–1096. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2016.03.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pedersen M, Egerod I, Overgaard D, Baastrup M, Andersen I. Social inequality in phase II cardiac rehabilitation attendance: the impact of potential mediators. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2018;17(4):345–355. doi: 10.1177/1474515117746011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ruano-Ravina A, Pena-Gil C, Abu-Assi E, Raposeiras S, van’t Hof A, Meindersma E, et al. Participation and adherence to cardiac rehabilitation programs. A systematic review. Int J Cardiol. 2016;223:436–443. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.08.120. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pedersen M, Støier L, Egerod I, Overgaard D. Mastery of everyday life and social support needs in older vulnerable women with myocardial infarction and their relatives: a qualitative study. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2021. 10.1093/eurjcn/zvab014. - PubMed

Associated data

Grants and funding