The effectiveness of self-management support interventions for men with long-term conditions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Citation

Galdas P, Fell J, Bower P, Kidd L, Blickem C, McPherson K, Hunt K, Gilbody S & Richardson G (2015) The effectiveness of self-management support interventions for men with long-term conditions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 5 (3), Art. No.: e006620. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006620

Abstract
Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of self-management support interventions in men with longterm conditions.  Methods: A quantitative systematic review with meta-analysis.  Data sources: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched to identify published reviews of self-management support interventions. Relevant reviews were screened to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of self-management support interventions conducted in men alone, or which analysed the effects of interventions by sex.  Review methods: Data on relevant outcomes, patient populations, intervention type and study quality were extracted. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effects of interventions in men, women, and mixed-sex sub-groups.  Results: 40 RCTs of self-management support interventions in men, and 20 eligible RCTs where an analysis by sex was reported, were included in the review. Meta-analysis suggested that physical activity, education, and peer support-based interventions have a positive impact on quality of life in men. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to make strong statements about whether self-management support interventions show larger, similar or smaller effects in men compared with women and mixed-sex groups.  Conclusions: Clinicians may wish to consider whether certain types of self-management support (eg, physical activity, education, peer support) are particularly effective in men, although more research is needed to fully determine and explore this.

Journal
BMJ Open: Volume 5, Issue 3

• Galdas, Fell et al.pdf