Evaluation of arthritis self-management courses led by laypersons and by professionals

Authors

  • Judith L. Cohen MPH,

    Program Director
    1. Rehabilitation Program office, Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, School of Medicine and the Department of Health Education, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Suzanne van Houten Sauter MD,

    Corresponding author
    1. Rehabilitation Program office, Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, School of Medicine and the Department of Health Education, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
    • Rehabilitation Program office, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC 27514
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Robert F. Devellis PhD,

    Assistant Director
    1. Rehabilitation Program office, Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, School of Medicine and the Department of Health Education, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Brenda Mcevoy DeVellis PhD

    Assistant Professor of Health Education
    1. Rehabilitation Program office, Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, School of Medicine and the Department of Health Education, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

We compared the relative effectiveness of 2 arthritis patient education interventions. One intervention was modeled after that developed by Lorig, whereas the other had similar content but used health professionals rather than laypersons as instructors. Both interventions resulted in an increase in patients' knowledge of arthritis and in their use of exercise compared with a control group that received no intervention. However, neither intervention was any more effective than nonintervention in lessening patients' pain, improving their functioning, enhancing social support systems, lessening their depression, or improving their health behaviors beyond that of exercise. No differences in outcome measures were found between groups led by professional instructors and those led by lay instructors.

Ancillary