Evidence Hub

Psychosocial predictors of health behavior adherence in heart-failure patients with comorbid depression: a secondary analysis of the Hopeful Heart trial

Alba Carrillo, B. Belnap, Scott Rothenberger, Robert Feldman, B. Rollman, C. Celano

BMC Psychology, 2024

629 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

Background Depression affects 20–30% of individuals with heart failure (HF), and it is associated with worse health outcomes independent of disease severity. One potential explanation is the adverse impact of depression on HF patients’ adherence to the health behaviors needed to self-manage their condition. The aim of this study is to identify characteristics associated with lower adherence in this population, which could help to recognize individuals at higher risk and eventually tailor health behavior interventions to their needs. Methods Using data from a randomized, controlled, collaborative care treatment trial in 629 patients with HF and comorbid depression, we performed mixed effects logistic regression analyses to examine the cross-sectional and prospective relationships between medical and psychosocial variables and health behavior adherence, including adherence to medications, a low-sodium diet, and physician appointments. Results In cross-sectional analyses, married marital status and higher physical health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were associated with greater overall adherence (compared to married, single Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.46, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.26–0.80; other OR = 0.60, CI = 0.38–0.94; p = .012. Physical HRQoL OR = 1.02, CI = 1.00-1.04, p = .047). Prospectively, greater levels of social support were associated with improved overall adherence one year later (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.00-1.08, p = .037). Social support, HF symptom severity, race…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 629 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free