Trial reportJournal of advanced nursing2012
Randomized controlled trial of a lay-facilitated angina management programme.
Trial report in Journal of advanced nursing, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Social network interventions to support cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention in the management of people with heart disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Use of health economic evaluation in the implementation and improvement science fields-a systematic literature review.Implementation science : IS · 2019Pooled it
- Patient education in the management of coronary heart disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Impact of self-management interventions on stable angina symptoms and health-related quality of life: a meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2014Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Metacognitive therapy home-based self-help for anxiety and depression in cardiovascular disease patients in the UK: A single-blind randomised controlled trial.PLoS medicine · 2023Trial
- A web-based program improves physical activity outcomes in a primary care angina population: randomized controlled trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2014Trial
- Participants' experiences of care during a randomized controlled trial comparing a lay-facilitated angina management programme with usual care: a qualitative study using focus groups.Journal of advanced nursing · 2013Trial
- The role of community health workers in primary healthcare in the WHO-EU region: a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Effects of self-management interventions in adults with acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Revista de salud publica (Bogota, Colombia) · 2023Article
- Health literacy interventions for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease: a scoping review.Open heart · 2022Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of the Core Components of Cardiac Rehabilitation on Mortality and Morbidity: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2018Review
- Technology-Enabled Remote Monitoring and Self-Management - Vision for Patient Empowerment Following Cardiac and Vascular Surgery: User Testing and Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol.JMIR research protocols · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis article reports a randomized controlled trial of lay-facilitated angina management (registered trial acronym: LAMP).
backgroundPreviously, 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.
designA randomized controlled trial comparing a lay-facilitated angina management programme with routine care from an angina nurse specialist.
methodsParticipants 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.
resultsThere 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.
conclusionThe angina management programme produced some superior benefits when compared to advice from a specialist nurse.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.