Application of health education and promotion theory-based interventions on patients with cardiovascular disease: A systematic review

• Main Authors: Bahram Mohebbi, Maryam Sabouri, Azar Tol
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2021-01-01
• Series: Journal of Education and Health Promotion
• Subjects: cardiovascular disease; education; health education; health promotion; intervention; model; outcome; practice; theory
• Online Access: http://www.jehp.net/article.asp?issn=2277-9531;year=2021;volume=10;issue=1;spage=236;epage=236;aulast=Mohebbi

BACKGROUND: Adopting healthy behaviors can lead to better outcomes which can deeply impact cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) development; consequently, tailoring appropriate theory-based interventions may improve various outcomes among patients at CV risks. This study aimed to assess published researches on the application of health education and promotion of intrapersonal and interpersonal theories/models' interventions on patients with CVD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this systematic review, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, Science Direct, and SID, Magiran databases for English and Persian studies were searched using relevant keywords, respectively. We searched for interventional studies published with no time limits until the end of 2020 assessing the application of health education and promotion theories/models interventions on adult patients with CVDs. Two reviewers individually reviewed abstracts/full-text articles to assess inclusion according to predefined criteria. In case of discrepancy between the two researchers, a third expert was requested to assess papers, and final selection decision was made based on the agreement among the three evaluators. This systematic review was conducted using the following data extraction steps and assessing the quality of the studies and results. RESULTS: From 60 articles, 35 studies met inclusion criteria. Most interventions improved at least some educational including models constructs (20%), clinical (14.2%), and practical (88.5%) outcome related to CVDs. It is noted that attention to educational, practical, and clinical outcomes was focused in published papers, respectively. Furthermore, based on the study categorization using models, some CVDs and theories/models were more concerned compared to others. CONCLUSIONS: Health education and promotion theory-based interventions on patients with CVD appeared beneficial in the most published paper.