Time Effects of Supportive Interaction and Facilitator Input Variety on Treatment Adherence of Young People with Chronic Health Conditions: A Dynamic Mechanism in Mutual Aid Groups

Abstract

This study aims to examine the mechanism of how supportive interaction and facilitator input variety in mutual aid groups impact treatment adherence of young people with chronic health conditions, with consideration of time effects, which have been rarely studied in the existing literature. A stratified random sample of 391 individuals aged 12–45 years with chronic health conditions were recruited from mutual aid groups in Hong Kong and completed both the baseline and 12-month follow-up surveys. The results of the structural equation modeling indicated that supportive interaction and facilitator input variety positively predicted treatment adherence in a delayed condition, whereas members’ treatment adherence in the baseline survey had reversed effects on members’ supportive interaction in the follow-up survey. The findings of this study shed light on the dynamic mechanism of the mutual aid groups and provide important implications to promote better rehabilitation outcomes of young people with chronic health conditions.

Association of chronic disease self-management with health locus of control study on diabetic patients

“…Self-stigmatization, coping with stigmatization, the effectiveness of health care, and compliance with treatment are critical elements in chronic disease selfmanagement. 17 In this study, it was observed that the mean total score of the participants obtained from the chronic disease self-management scale was moderate (mean: 64.11±5.4; min: 21; max: 105). Among the sub-dimensions, self-stigmatization (mean: 20.80±4.2 min: 9 max: 33), coping with stigmatization (mean: 16.39±3.4 min: 9 max: 25), and health care effectiveness (mean: 12.73±2.7 min: 8 max: 20) were at a low level, but compliance with treatment (mean: 15.81±4.0 min: 5 max: 25) was at a medium level.…”

Mediating Effects of Emotional Support Reception and Provision on the Relationship between Group Interaction and Psychological Well-Being: A Study of Young Patients

“…The small improvements may be due to two possibilities: First, the relatively short time interval (12 months) of the current study; second, psychological well-being at baseline was collected after 6 months (at least) of participation in mutual aid groups, thus individuals may have already improved their well-being up to that point and the current analyses are picking up on any additional change over the next year. In previous studies, researchers asserted that the positive impact of mutual aid groups can be long-lasting, but that it takes time to develop because group members need time to establish trust and mutual aid [28,69]. To enhance the clinical relevance of the present findings, future research may set the baseline at the beginning of mutual aid groups and use a longer time to investigate the underlying mechanism of how mutual aid groups function to facilitate their members' psychological well-being.…”

“…Mutual aid is a kind of interactive support that occurs between people with similar concerns or problems, such as PCHC [28]. It comes in various forms, but most commonly, it consists of instrumental support (e.g., tangible service), informational support (e.g., advice), and emotional support (e.g., empathy and love) [29].…”

Adapted Physical Activity Programs for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Neurotypical Children: Differences between Online and Face-to-Face Training

“…In our sample, the execution of the motor protocol combined with the possibility of meeting each other, even if virtually, led to a growing desire in the children to improve themselves, with the incentive to overcome their limits; it is plausible to say that there were also experiences of positive motor reinforcement [39], filling some initial gaps. The participants with ASD-HF integrated perfectly with the group and they protected and supported each other, creating a community that aimed to improve all participants [40]. The decision to include both children with typical development and those with high-functioning autism (ASD-HF) was based on an interest in comparing children's responses and needs related to physical activity practice and well-being.…”