Being the Spouse of a Heart Patient: A Qualitative Study on the Spouse's Views and Experiences

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to reveal the views of the spouses of individuals with coronary artery disease regarding the adaptation process to daily life and the difficulties experienced during the process. Material and Methods: This qualitative and descriptive study was conducted between October 2021 and February 2022. The research sample consisted of the spouses of 16 patients who were followed up with a diagnosis of coronary artery disease for at least one year in a university hospital located in the city center of Ankara and who were hospitalized for at least one day. An information form and a semi-structured interview form were used to collect data. The COREQ was used in the structuring and reporting phase of the qualitative research. The data were coded using the MAXQDA 20 Plus program. Results: Findings related to the experiences of the participants were grouped under 5 themes and 8 sub-themes. Our findings indicate that the daily lives of spouses are affected physically, psychologically and socially; the stress and anxiety levels of the spouses changed with the diagnosis; and there have been changes in family-wife roles. Conclusion: As revealed in our study, it is of great importance that spouses and caregivers receive training and inform about emergencies in the management of coronary artery diseases, as in every chronic disease.

Keywords

• Coronary artery diseases
• spouse
• nursing
• qualitative research

References

1. Yalçın R, Cemri M, Boyacı B, Timurkaynak T, Akata D, Ünlü M . Coronary artery disease. Gazi Medical Journal. 2006; 17(1): 1-33.
2. Kurçer MA, Özbay A. The effect of lifestyle education and counseling on quality of life in coronary artery patients. Anadolu Journal of Cardiology. 2011;11:107-13. https://doi.org/10.5152/akd.2011.028
3. Yeşil P, Altıok M. The importance of physical activity in the prevention and control of cardiovascular diseases. Turk Soc Cardiol Turkish Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 2012; 3(3): 39-48. https://doi.org/10.5543/khd.2012.005
4. Jane SL. Intraoperative progress reports decrease family members' anxiety. Aorn Journal. 1996; 64: 424-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0001-2092(06)63055-x
5. Ekiz S, Göz F. Evaluation of the effect of informing patients before coronary angiography on anxiety levels. Ataturk University Nursing School Journal. 2005; 8: 1.
6. Family Caregiver Alliance. Caregiver assessment: principles, guidelines and strategies for change report. From a national consensus development conference. Vol. I [Internet]. San Francisco: Family Caregiver Alliance; 2006 [cited 2021 Nov 21]. Available from: http://www.caregiver.org/caregiver/jsp/content/pdfs/v1_consensus
7. Mystakidou K, Tsilika E, Parpa E, Galanos A, et al. Caregivers of advanced cancer patients: feelings of hopelessness and depression. Cancer Nursing. 2007;30:412–418. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NCC.0000290807.84076.73
8. Schulz R, Sherwood PR. Physical and mental health effects of family caregiving. The American Journal of Nursing. 2008;108(9):23–27. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000336406.45248.4c

9. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal of Quality in Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
10. Rolland, J. S. (1987). Chronic illness and the life cycle: A conceptual framework. Fam Process, 26(2), 203-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545- 5300.1987.00203.x
11. Aksayan S, Emiroğlu ON. Evaluation of nursing research reports in terms of method presentation. Journal of Nursing Research. 1999;1(1):41-46.
12. Kleysen RF, Street CT. Towards a multi-dimensional measure of individual innovative behavior. Journal of Intellectual Capital.2001;2(3):284-296. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005660
13. Polit DF, Beck CT, Hungler BP. Essentials of nursing research: methods, appraisal, and utilization. Philadelphia: Lippincott. Press; 2001. P: 52-120.
14. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. qualitative research in psychology. 2006;3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
15. Graneheim U, Lindgren BM, Lundman B. Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: a discussion paper. Nurse Education Today. 2017;56:29-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002
16. Tülüce D, Kartal M. Gender difference in CAD. Turk J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2021;12(29):183-189. https://doi.org/10.5543/khd.2021.84856
17. Lachman S, Minneboo M, Snaterse M, Jorstad HT, Riet TG, Reimer WJO, et al., Community-based comprehensive lifestyle programs in patients with coronary artery disease: objectives, design and expected results of randomized evaluation of secondary prevention by outpatient nurse Specialists 2 trial (Response 2). Am. Heart J. 2015;170:216–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2015.05.010
18. Magid M, Jones J, Allen AL, McIlvennan CK, Magid K, Thompson JS, et al. Important elements of caregiving for an LVAD patient. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 2016; 31(3): 215-225. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCN.0000000000000242
19. Lindenfeld J, Albert NM, Boehmer JP, Collins SP, Ezekowitz JA, Givertz MM, et al. Heart Failure Society of America HFSA comprehensive heart failure practice guideline. J Card Fail. 2010;16(6):e1-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2010.04.004
20. Bennett SJ, Perkins SM, Lane KA, Deer M, Brater DC, Murray MD. Social support and health-related quality of life in chronic heart failure patients. Qual Life Res. 2001;10(8): 671Y682. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1013815825500
21. Chung ML, Lennie TA, Riegel B, Wu JR, Dekker RL, Moser DK. Marital status as an independent predictor of event free survival of patients with heart failure. Am J Crit Care. 2009;18(6):562Y570. https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2009388
22. Thomson P, Angus NJ, Andreis F, Rushworth GF, Mohan AR, Chung ML & Leslie SJ. Longitudinal evaluation of the effects of illness perceptions and beliefs about cardiac rehabilitation on quality of life of patients with coronary artery disease and their caregivers. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2020;18:158. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01405-0
23. Tulloch H, Bouchard K, Clyde MJ, Madrazo L, Demidenko N, Johnson S, Greenman P. Learning a new way of living together: a qualitative study exploring the relationship changes and intervention needs of patients with cardiovascular disease and their partners. BMJ open. 2020; 10(5):e032948. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032948
24. Vilchinsky N. Unrecognized, undiagnosed, and untreated: cardiac-disease-induced PTSD among patients’ partners. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:1265. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01265
25. Noonan MC, Wingham J, Taylor RS. ‘Who cares?’ The experiences of caregivers of adults living with heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and coronary artery disease: a mixed methods systematic review. BMJ Open. 2018;8:e020927. https://doi.org/ 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020927
26. Verweij L, Jørstad HT, Minneboo M, Riet GT, Peters RJG, Reimer SWJM, Snaterse M. The influence of partners on successful lifestyle modification in patients with coronary artery disease. International Journal of Cardiology. 2021;332:195–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJCARD.2021.04.007
27. Halm MA. Specific needs, concerns, strategies and advice of caregivers after coronary artery bypass surgery. Heart & Lung: The Journal of Cardiopulmonary and Acute Care. 2016; 45(5):416–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2016.07.001
28. Dalteg T, Benzein E, Fridlund B, Malm D. Cardiac disease and its consequences on the partner relationship: a systematic review. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 2011; 10(3):140-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2011.01.00
29. Tillmann T, Vaucher J, Okbay A, Pikhart H, Peasey A, Kubinova R et al. Education and coronary heart disease: mendelian randomisation study BMJ. 2017;358:j3542 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j3542