The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology · 2024
Utilization of Face-to-Face Vestibular Support Groups: A Comparison to Online Group Participation.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vanstrum Erik B, Jung Kim Min, Ziltzer Ryan S, Doherty Joni K, Bassett Alaina M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study compared the utilization and outcomes of face-to-face (F2F) vestibular support groups and online support communities (OSC) for individuals with vestibular disorders.
METHODS: We distributed a 31-question anonymous electronic survey through the Vestibular Disorders Association (VeDA) to F2F participants, categorizing user involvement in F2F, OSCs, or both and assessed impact on medical decision-making, psychosocial benefits, and goals achieved.
RESULTS: The F2F cohort consisted of 97 individuals comprising primarily of non-Hispanic White women (mean age = 57 years, SD ± 14 years) with diagnoses including persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (19%), Meniere's disease (15%), and vestibular neuritis (13%). Most participants were diagnosed by an otolaryngologist (65%) and attended F2F meetings monthly or less frequently (78%). The OSC group comprised of 551 individuals, primarily of non-Hispanic White women, but was younger in age (mean age = 50 years, SD ± 13 years). OSC participants notably engaged more, with 36% participating on a daily basis and 32% multiple times a week. F2F participants were older (mean age 57 years vs 50 years, P < .001) and more commonly referred by medical professionals (22% F2F vs 6% OSC, P < .001). Both groups had similar achieved goals, including hearing from others with the same diagnosis (84% vs 89%, P > .05) and similar impact on medical decision-making (75% vs 78%, P > .05). More F2F participants reported increased development of coping skills (79% F2F vs 69% OSC, P = .037). OSC participants typically found the group via an online search (75%), compared to 51% for F2F. OSC participants had higher daily engagement (36%) compared to F2F (1%).
CONCLUSION: F2F users are older and more commonly referred by medical professionals. Despite less frequent engagement, F2F participants reported similar influences on achieved goals, medical decision-making, and impact on psychosocial benefits. These findings highlight the importance of both F2F and OSC support groups for individuals with vestibular disorders.
METHODS: We distributed a 31-question anonymous electronic survey through the Vestibular Disorders Association (VeDA) to F2F participants, categorizing user involvement in F2F, OSCs, or both and assessed impact on medical decision-making, psychosocial benefits, and goals achieved.
RESULTS: The F2F cohort consisted of 97 individuals comprising primarily of non-Hispanic White women (mean age = 57 years, SD ± 14 years) with diagnoses including persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (19%), Meniere's disease (15%), and vestibular neuritis (13%). Most participants were diagnosed by an otolaryngologist (65%) and attended F2F meetings monthly or less frequently (78%). The OSC group comprised of 551 individuals, primarily of non-Hispanic White women, but was younger in age (mean age = 50 years, SD ± 13 years). OSC participants notably engaged more, with 36% participating on a daily basis and 32% multiple times a week. F2F participants were older (mean age 57 years vs 50 years, P < .001) and more commonly referred by medical professionals (22% F2F vs 6% OSC, P < .001). Both groups had similar achieved goals, including hearing from others with the same diagnosis (84% vs 89%, P > .05) and similar impact on medical decision-making (75% vs 78%, P > .05). More F2F participants reported increased development of coping skills (79% F2F vs 69% OSC, P = .037). OSC participants typically found the group via an online search (75%), compared to 51% for F2F. OSC participants had higher daily engagement (36%) compared to F2F (1%).
CONCLUSION: F2F users are older and more commonly referred by medical professionals. Despite less frequent engagement, F2F participants reported similar influences on achieved goals, medical decision-making, and impact on psychosocial benefits. These findings highlight the importance of both F2F and OSC support groups for individuals with vestibular disorders.