Article

PURPOSE: To describe the development and feasibility of a self-management
intervention called the Help to Overcome Problems Effectively (HOPE: MS), aimed
at improving the physical and psychological wellbeing of people living with
Multiple Sclerosis (MS). METHOD: HOPE: MS is an innovative, 6-week group-based,
manualised self-management intervention combining positive psychology theory and
practice, and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). Participants (N = 21)
recruited via a local East Midlands branch of the MS Society attended one of
three HOPE: MS interventions and completed self-reported outcome measures in week
1 and week 6. The following outcome measures were used: The Multiple Sclerosis
Impact Scale; Multiple Sclerosis Fatigue Severity Scale; The Multiple Sclerosis
Self-Efficacy Scale; The Adult State Hope Scale; The Hospital Anxiety and
Depression Scale; The Positive and Negative Affect Scale. RESULTS:
Post-intervention (6 weeks) mean scores decreased in the physical impact
(baseline M = 65.6, SD = 17.4; 6 weeks M = 55.1, SD = 17.9, 95% CI [-4.39,
-16.47] and the psychological impact of MS (baseline M = 24.0, SD = 7.3; 6 weeks
M = 18.9; SD = 6.3, 95% CI [-2.54, -7.66]). There was also a decrease mean
fatigue severity scores (baseline 49.4, SD = 13.3, 6 weeks M = 41.1, SD = 14.4,
95% CI [-2.65, -13.44]). There was a mean decrease in depression scores (baseline
M = 6.9, SD = 3.5; 6 weeks M = 4.2, SD = 2.8, 95% CI [-1.43, -4.00]). There were
smaller mean decreases in anxiety (baseline M = 7.6, SD = 3.4; 6 weeks M = 6.7
(4.0), 95% CI [0.69, -2.50]) and negative affect (baseline M = 22.9, SD = 6.8; 6
weeks M = 20.8 (8.1), 95% CI [0.69, -2.50]) refer Table 3 ). Mean MS
self-efficacy scores (baseline 21.7, SD = 4.2; 6 weeks M = 24.1, SD = 4.7, 95% CI
[0.23, 4.53]), mean total hope scores (baseline M = 23.3, SD = 10.7; 6 weeks M =
32.2 (10.6), 95% CI [4.91, 12.9]), hope agency scores (baseline M = 10.5, SD =
5.7; 6 weeks M = 15.7 (6.2), 95% CI [2.37, 8.01]), hope pathways (baseline M =
12.9, SD = 6.0; 6 weeks M = 16.6 (4.9), 95% CI [2.00, 5.43]) and positive affect
scores increased (baseline M = 27.3, SD = 7.1; 6 months M = 32.2, SD = 8.4, 95%
CI [0.42, 9.39]). Participants positively rated the intervention quality and
delivery. CONCLUSIONS: This feasibility study showed that the HOPE: MS was
acceptable and useful to people living with MS. Further robust evaluations using
a randomised controlled trial design with longer follow ups are needed to confirm
early promising results of the HOPE: MS. Implications for rehabilitation Living
with MS requires constant adjustments to cope with unpredictable symptoms.
Self-management interventions have the potential to help people living with MS to
improve their quality of life. A feasibility study of the HOPE: MS
self-management group-based intervention showed that it was acceptable and useful
to people living with MS.

Langue : ANGLAIS