Ischemic heart disease (IHD) displays wide social inequalities that are often explained with reference to lifestyle factors. However, research indicates that social support may also play an important role in social inequality in IHD. This study aims to explore the role of social support in the experience of life with IHD for socially disadvantaged patients.
Methods
The study was conducted as a critical hermeneutic qualitative study in Denmark between October 2018 and August 2019. Data consist of in-depth qualitative interviews with 30 socially disadvantaged patients with IHD.
Results
The findings showed a notable difference between the participants who were engaged in close and supportive social relationships and those who were not. Life with IHD for those who lacked supportive relationships tended to be marked by feelings of chaos, powerlessness and meaninglessness. Contrarily, those who were engaged in supportive relationships received help to navigate their life with illness, reconcile with what had happened to them, feel empowered, and gain a sense of meaning in their life.
Discussion: Social support from close social relationships appears to be crucial for socially disadvantaged ischemic heart patients, and should be encouraged and facilitated in healthcare and interventions targeting this patient group.
SeverinoPD’amatoAPucciM, et al.Ischemic heart disease pathophysiology paradigms overview: from plaque activation to microvascular dysfunction. Int J Mol Sci2020; 21: 1–30.
2.
MorysJMBellwonJHöferS, et al.Quality of life in patients with coronary heart disease after myocardial infarction and with ischemic heart failure. Arch Med Sci2016; 12: 326–333.
3.
BarbareschiGSandermanRKempenGIJM, et al.Socioeconomic status and the course of quality of life in older patients with coronary heart disease. Int J Behav Med2009; 16: 197–204.
4.
MateticABharadwajAMohamedMO, et al.Socioeconomic Status and differences in the management and outcomes of 6.6 million US patients With acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol2020; 129: 10–18.
5.
HutchisonJHoldsworthJ. What choice? Risk and responsibilisation in cardiovascular health policy. Health2019; 25(3): 288–305. DOI: 10.1177/1363459319886106.
6.
LinkBGPhelanJ. Social conditions as fundamental causes of disease. J Health Soc Behav1995; Extra Issue: Forty Years of Medical Sociology: The State of the Art and Directions for the Future: 80–94.
7.
PhelanJCLinkBG. Fundamental cause theory. In: CockerhamWC (eds) Medical sociology on the move: new directions in theory. Nordrecht: Springer, 2013, pp.105–125.
8.
CohenSWillsTA. Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull1985; 98: 310–357.
9.
KleinJVonneilichNBaumeisterSE, et al.Do social relations explain health inequalities? Evidence from a longitudinal survey in a changing eastern German region. Int J Public Health2012; 57: 619–627.
10.
GreenYSHajdukAMSongX, et al.Usefulness of social support in older adults after hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (from the SILVER-AMI study). Am J Cardiol2020; 125: 313–319.
11.
HansenCZinckernagelLSchneeklothN, et al.The association between supportive relatives and lower occurrence of anxiety and depression in heart patients: results from a nationwide survey. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs2017; 16: 733–741.
12.
MorseJM. Qualitative health research. 1st Editio. New York: Routledge, 2016.
13.
EapenDJWambachKDomianEW. A qualitative description of pregnancy-related social support experiences of Low-income women with Low birth weight infants in the midwestern United States. Matern Child Health J2019; 23: 1473–1481.
14.
BowerKLKempCLBurgessEO, et al.Complexity of care: stressors and strengths among low-income mother-daughter dyads. J Women Aging2020; 32: 131–148.
15.
HannaAYaelEMHadassaL, et al.``It's Up to me with a little support’’ – adherence after myocardial infarction: a qualitative study. Int J Nurs Stud2020; 101: 103416.
16.
GalickAD’Arrigo-PatrickEKnudson-MartinC. Can anyone hear me? Does anyone see me? A qualitative meta-analysis of women's Experiences of heart disease. Qual Health Res2015; 25: 1123–1138.
17.
ChildSTAlbertMA. Social networks and health outcomes: importance for racial and socioeconomic disparities in cardiovascular outcomes. Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep2018; 12: 1–7, 30. DOI: 10.1007/s12170-018-0594-5.
18.
SvendsenMTBakCKSørensenK, et al.Associations of health literacy with socioeconomic position, health risk behavior, and health status: a large national population-based survey among danish adults. BMC Public Health2020; 20: 1–12.
19.
RasmussenANGuiseAOvergaardC. Understanding social inequalities in cardiac treatment through the lens of cultural health capital: a study of danish socially disadvantaged ischemic heart patients’ lived experiences of healthcare interactions. Social Theory & Health2021; Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1057/s41285-021-00173-1.
20.
RasmussenANPetersenKSOvergaardC. An overwhelming burden of psychosocial stress: life with ischemic heart disease for midlife patients with low socioeconomic status and lack of flexible resources. Qual Heal Res. Epub ahead of print 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732321104349.
21.
PattonMQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage, 2002, Epub ahead of print 2002. DOI: 10.2307/330063.
22.
SørensenKVan Den BrouckeSPelikanJM, et al.Measuring health literacy in populations: illuminating the design and development process of the european health literacy survey questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q). BMC Public Health2013; 13: 1–10, 948. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-948.
23.
StormacqCBrouckeSVDWosinskiJ. Does health literacy mediate the relationship between socioeconomic status and health disparities? Integrative review. Health Promot Int2019; 34: 1–17.
24.
BerkmanLGlassTBrisetteI, et al.From social integration to health: durkheim in the new millennium. Soc Sci Med2000; 51: 843–857.
25.
The Danish Evaluation Institute. Referencing the Danish Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning to the European Qualifications Framework. 2011.
26.
ChristensenUKrølnerRNilssonCJ, et al.Addressing social inequality in aging by the danish occupational social class measurement. J Aging Health2014; 26: 106–127.
27.
FylanF. Semi-structured interviewing. In: MilesJGilbertP (eds) A handbook of research methods for clinical and health psychology semi-structured interviewing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, pp.65–77.
28.
SimonÿCSpechtKAndersenIC, et al.A ricoeur-inspired approach to interpret participant observations and interviews. Glob Qual Nurs Res2018; 5: 1–10.
The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of The European Parliament and the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repaling Directive 95/46/EC, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj (2016).
31.
UphoffEPPickettKECabiesesB, et al.A systematic review of the relationships between social capital and socioeconomic inequalities in health: a contribution to understanding the psychosocial pathway of health inequalities. Int J Equity Health2013; 12: 1–12.
32.
AntonovskyA. Unraveling the mystery of health. How people manage stress and stay well. 1st ed. San Francisco & London: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1987.
33.
LundbergO. Childhood conditions, sense of coherence, social class and adult ill health: exploring their theoretical and empirical relations. Soc Sci Med1997; 44: 821–831.
34.
SamerskiS. Health literacy as a social practice : social and empirical dimensions of knowledge on health and healthcare. Soc Sci Med2019; 226: 1–8.
35.
WilliamsGElliottE. Exploring social inequalities in health: the importance of thinking qualitatively. In: BourgeaultIDingwallRVriesRD (eds) The SAGE handbook of qualitative methods in health research. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2010, pp.106–122.
36.
LakeyBOrehekE. Relational regulation theory: a New approach to explain the link between perceived social support and mental health. Psychol Rev2011; 118: 482–495.
37.
FeeneyBCCollinsNL. A New Look at Social Support: A Theoretical Perspective on Thriving Through Relationships. 2015. Epub ahead of print 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1088868314544222.
38.
MarcusGLitovchikIPeregD, et al.Impact of marital status on the outcome of acute coronary syndrome: results from the acute coronary syndrome Israeli survey. J Am Heart Assoc2019; 8(14): 1–7. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.118.011664.
39.
SchultzWMHayekSSTahhanAS, et al.Marital status and outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. J Am Heart Assoc2017; 6: 1–9.
40.
SchaerGLBraunL. Marital Status and cardiovascular health: is there a link?Cardiovasc Revascularization Med2018; 19: A3–A4.
41.
RaparelliVProiettiMBasiliS. Explanatory power of gender relations in cardiovascular outcomes: the missing piece of the puzzle. Heart2018; 104: 1900–1901.
42.
StrongeSOverallNCSibleyCG. Gender differences in the associations between relationship Status, social support, and wellbeing. J Fam Psychol2019; 33: 819–829.
43.
De VogliRChandolaTMarmotMG. Negative aspects of close relationships and heart disease. Arch Intern Med2007; 167: 1951–1957.
44.
AlbrektsenGHeuchILøchenML, et al.Lifelong gender gap in risk of incident myocardial infarction: the tromsø study. JAMA Intern Med2016; 176: 1673–1679.
45.
KangXLiZNolanMT. Informal caregivers’ experiences of caring for patients with chronic heart failure: systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies. J Cardiovasc Nurs2011; 26: 386–394.
46.
RoslandAMPietteJD. Emerging models for mobilizing family support for chronic disease management: a structured review. Chronic Illn2010; 6: 7–21.
47.
ParryMWatt-WatsonJ. Peer support intervention trials for individuals with heart disease: a systematic review. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs2010; 9: 57–67.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
