Learning Objective #1: describe two ways a support group can impact the ICD recipient using a framework combining social support and chronic illness | |||
Learning Objective #2: verbalize the differences in level of anxiety and satisfaction with social support in patients who do and do not attend an ICD support group. |
Comparisons were made between 73 patients who attended a support group and 77 who did not. Anxiety was evaluated using the Speilberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory, and social support using the Sarason Social Support Questionnaire.
Patients who attended a support group had higher trait anxiety, yet a more normalized state anxiety. In addition, patients who did not attend a group, but who had more people in their network and who lived in an urban area had greater predicted satisfaction with support (p= .004). Among all patients, as satisfaction with support increased, both state (p= .000) and trait (p= .000) anxiety decreased; and those with a larger network also had higher satisfaction with support (p= .02). Finally, having the diagnosis of an irregular fast heartbeat influenced trait anxiety (p= .046). These results support the framework by demonstrating the impact of anxiety, how a support intervention buffers anxiety, and how a large network can increase support satisfaction. In addition, those with lower support satisfaction were drawn to a support group intervention. These findings warrant further investigation in utilization of support groups. In the future, nurses can use the framework’s concepts to become more involved in addressing ICD patient concerns and providing support through the development of diverse interventions.