Skip to main content
Download PDF

Illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence and quality of life in patients with intermittent claudication – a longitudinal cohort study

BMC Nursing volume 22, Article number: 167 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Patients with intermittent claudication need lifelong treatment with secondary prevention to prevent cardiovascular events and progression of atherosclerotic disease. Illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence to medication treatment, and quality of life are factors influencing patients’ self-management. Knowledge of these factors could be important when planning for secondary prevention in patients with intermittent claudication.

Aim

to compare illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence to treatment, and quality of life in in patients with intermittent claudication.

Methods

A longitudinal cohort study was conducted with 128 participants recruited from vascular units in southern Sweden. Data were collected through medical records and questionnaires regarding illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence to treatment, and quality of life.

Results

In the subscales in illness perception, patients with sufficient health literacy reported less consequences and lower emotional representations of the intermittent claudication. They also reported higher self-efficacy and higher quality of life than patients with insufficient health literacy. In comparison between men and women in illness perception, women reported higher illness coherence and emotional representations associated with intermittent claudication compared to men. A multiple regression showed that both consequences and adherence were negative predictors of quality of life. When examining changes over time, a significant increase in quality of life was seen between baseline and 12 months, but there were no significant differences in self-efficacy..

Conclusion

Illness perception differs in relation to level of health literacy and between men and women. Further, the level of health literacy seems to be of importance for patients’ self-efficacy and quality of life. This illuminates the need for new strategies for improving health literacy, illness perception, and self-efficacy over time. For example, more tailored information regarding secondary prevention could be provided to strengthen self-management to further improve quality of life in patients with intermittent claudication.

Peer Review reports

Background

Patients with intermittent claudication (IC) need lifelong treatment with secondary prevention to prevent cardiovascular events and progression of the atherosclerotic disease [1]. IC is further associated with decreased quality of life (QoL) due to presence of pain and loss of walking ability, which means that living with IC involves managing symptoms to maintain QoL [2]. Importantly, many of these patients do not get secondary prevention support according to the recommendations in current guidelines [1, 3, 4]. Studies have shown that IC is largely unrecognized and under-treated compared to other cardiovascular diseases and that there is a lack of public and patient awareness [5, 6]. The way patients perceive illness is one relevant aspect that determines their health-management behaviour, [7] and it can be improved by patient education [8,9,10]. Therefore, factors that influence illness perception and QoL could provide important knowledge about how to improve secondary prevention treatment in patients with IC.

Approximately 236 million people globally live with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), [11] where IC is the mildest form, affecting10–20% [12]. IC is characterized by ischemic muscle pain during activity, [1] causing physical limitations and decreased QoL [2]. Since IC mainly derives from atherosclerosis, patients with IC are at significant risk of cardiovascular morbidity [13]. The risk factors consist of smoking, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, and diabetes mellitus; accordingly, secondary prevention with smoking cessation, physical activity, dietary changes, and best medical therapy (BMT, i.e., cholesterol reduction, antithrombotic drugs, and blood pressure control) are necessary for patients with IC to prevent progression of the atherosclerosis process and to prevent further cardiovascular morbidities [1]. Research has shown that there are differences between men and women with PAD. A systematic review showed in a meta-analysis that women tend to present more often with atypical leg symptoms compared to men and the review recommend that data on men and women should be reported separately [14]. This illuminates the importance of studying differences between men and women with IC in other variables as well.

Research has shown the importance of patients’ adherence to treatment in relation to QoL. Positive associations between adherence and QoL have been shown in other conditions, such as myocardial infarction, [15] diabetes mellitus, [16] and hypertension [17]. Besides the association between adherence to treatment and QoL, research in patients with coronary heart disease has reported positive associations between illness perceptions and QoL, where patients experiencing lower personal- and treatment control, lower illness coherence, or a cyclic timeline belief reported lower QoL [18]. However, research about associations between adherence to treatment, QoL, and illness perception in patients with IC is lacking.

Patients with PAD shape their own understandings of their conditions, which may influence their management of their disease and adherence to treatment [19]. The common-sense model (CSM) is a theoretical framework describing illness perception as a process for managing a health threat. The CSM includes perception, interpretation, and response to a health threat and consists of both cognitive and emotional representations in five subscales (identity, timeline, cause, control and cure, and consequences) [20]. Studies have shown associations between illness perception and adherence to secondary prevention in patients with coronary heart disease [21, 22].

Adherence to secondary prevention medication is vital to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality [23, 24]. However, low adherence to medical treatment has been reported in patients with IC, where only two thirds are taking antiplatelets and statins five years after diagnosis [25, 26]. Adherence to long-term treatment has been associated with several influencing factors, including those related to the patients (such as illness perception and self-efficacy) [27]. Additionally, beliefs regarding both medicines and illness together with self-efficacy need to be addressed to better understand adherence to medication treatment [28]. Another important factor for adherence is health literacy, which is described as the ability to “access”, “understand”, “appraise”, and “apply” health-related information. Health literacy influences self-management behaviours and individual outcomes in chronic diseases. Patients with IC having inadequate or problematic health literacy reported both lower self-efficacy and worse QoL [29]. Self-efficacy is described as an individual’s belief in their own capacity to execute behaviours necessary to face challenges and to complete a specific task [30]. For instance, among patients with PAD, better self-efficacy was associated with better walking ability [31]. Importantly, individuals with limited self-efficacy tend to avoid setting goals and experience low confidence in their ability to succeed in the task ahead, [30] leading to lower QoL [32], but nurse-led self-management programmes can enhance patients’ self-efficacy [33].

There is evidence that illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence to treatment and QoL influence the self-management in chronic diseases. Therefore, the contribution of the current study is to generate knowledge of these factors in patients with IC during the natural course of the disease the first year after diagnosis. This knowledge could further be used to improve strategies regarding secondary prevention care for patients with IC to increase their QoL. Accordingly, this study aimed to compare illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence to treatment, and QoL in patients with intermittent claudication.

The analysis was based on the following research questions:

What do patients with IC believe cause their illness?

What differences are there in illness perception between men and women and between patients with sufficient and insufficient health literacy?

What associations are there between illness perception, adherence, self-efficacy and quality of life?

What are the predictors of quality of life?

What changes are there in self-efficacy and quality of life during the first year after diagnosis?

Method

Design

This was a longitudinal cohort study in which the participants filled in the questionnaires at three different occasions (baseline, 6 months, and 12 months), and data from medical records were extracted at baseline (Fig. 1). A consecutive sample method was used to select participants. This means that all patients visiting three outpatient clinics for vascular diseases located in southern Sweden meeting the inclusion criteria were invited to participate during the time of the study.

Participants

Patients with a referral to one of the participating vascular clinics were recruited at their first visit to the outpatient clinic. At this visit, they were diagnosed with IC. All patients visiting these clinics received BMT, including medicine prescription and information of the importance of walking exercise and smoking cessation. The patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were asked for participation by registered nurses specialized in vascular diseases. The inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with IC (defined by clinical findings and ankle brachial index [ABI] < 0.9) and the ability to read and understand Swedish. Since the aim was to investigate the natural course of IC, patients with more severe PAD (rest pain, ulceration, and gangrene) or previously received surgical treatment for IC were excluded since their experience of the disease might differ from the patients newly diagnosed. The sampling procedure is accounted for in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow chart of data collection.

#Abbreviations for questionnaires:

HSL-EU-Q16-SE: Health literacy

S-GSE: Self-efficacy

VQ6: Quality of life

IPQ-R: Illness perception

MARS-5: Adherence to treatment.

Full size image

Data collection

The data were collected between 2018 and 2020. Patients interested in participation received oral and written information during the referral visit. The information was given by registered nurses specialized in vascular diseases at the three clinics included in the study. Baseline questionnaires (background data, health literacy, self-efficacy and QoL) and informed consent forms were handed out during the referral visit with the advice to fill in the forms at home, thus giving the patients time to consider the decision to participate. One reminder was sent to non-responders. The questionnaires were sent back to the research team using prepaid envelopes. For the follow-up, the patients received new sets of questionnaires by mail after 6 months (illness perception, self-efficacy, adherence and QoL) and after 12 months (self-efficacy and QoL) together with prepaid envelopes. Two reminders were sent to non-responders. Background data − such as demographics, co-morbidities, clinical characteristics, and lifestyle factors − were collected through a self-reported questionnaire developed only for this study. The lifestyle factors physical activity and smoking were included based on the importance of secondary prevention for patients with PAD [1, 13]. Physical activity was self-reported, and the two questions were phrased as follows: “Are you being physically active?” (yes/no) and “How many times per week are you being physically active?” (1–2, 3–4, > 4). ABI, blood pressure, cholesterol level, and blood glucose were collected from medical records at baseline. The data collection process is presented in Fig. 1.

Questionnaires

Data on illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence to medication treatment, and QoL were collected through self-administered questionnaires described below.

Illness perception

The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R) was based on the Common Sense Model of self-regulation [34] and revised with the following subscales: timeline acute/chronic, timeline cyclical, consequences, personal control, treatment control, illness coherence, and emotional representations, [35] which are accounted for in Table 1. The Swedish version of the instrument was validated and contains 38 items regarding perceptions of the illness and 18 items about causes of the illness. It uses a five-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The last item has an open-ended response where the patient should list the three most important causal factors of the disease [36]. On subscales with 6 items a maximum of 2 missing items were allowed. Cronbach’s alphas for the subscales in the current study were α = 0.82 for timeline acute/chronic, α = 0.79 for timeline cyclical, α = 0.71 for consequences, α = 0.65 for personal control, α = 0.79 for treatment control, α = 0.92 for illness coherence, and α = 0.86 for emotional representations.

Table 1 Interpretation of IPQ-R subscales (Moss-Morris et al., 2002)
Full size table

Health literacy

European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire 16 (HLS-EU-Q16-SE) was validated and translated to Swedish and is a short version of the European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU). It consists of 16 items in four different dimensions: “access/obtain”, “understand”, “process/appraise”, and “apply/use” health related information. It uses a four-point Likert scale: very easy, easy, difficult, very difficult. The responses very easy and easy were combined into one category (scored with one) and the responses very difficult and difficult were combined into another category (scored with zero). A sum score was calculated for respondents answering at least 14 questions [37] and divided into the three categories inadequate (0–8), problematic (9–12), and sufficient (13–16) [38]. The three health literacy levels were dichotomized into two levels: “insufficient” (“inadequate” and “problematic”) and “sufficient” health literacy [39]. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.91 in the current study.

Self-efficacy

The General Self-Efficacy Scale (S-GSE) is an instrument measuring the strength of an individual’s belief in their own ability to deal with difficult situations and setbacks [40]. The Swedish version of the instrument was validated [41, 42]. It consists of 10 items rated on a four-point Likert scale (not all true to exactly true). A total score was calculated where a high score indicates a high self-efficacy [40]. All the questions needed to be answered in order to be included in the analysis. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.92 in the current study.

Adherence to treatment

The Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) is the instrument used to determine patients’ self-reported adherence to medication treatment in general. In the current study, the patients were advised to report adherence specifically to the medication treatment for IC. The MARS consists of five items and uses a five-point Likert scale ranging from always to never. All questions needed to be answered in order to be included in the analysis. The instrument is valid and available in Swedish [43]. A total score was calculated where a higher score indicates a higher level for medication adherence [44]. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.57 in the current study, which is below the recommended value (α = 0.70) [45].

Quality of life

The Vascular Quality of Life Questionnaire-6 (VQ6) is a disease-specific instrument for the assessment of QoL in patients with PAD and is a short version of the Vascular Quality of Life Questionnaire (VascuQoL) [46]. The instrument was translated into Swedish and showed good psychometric properties [47, 48]. It consists of six items divided into five subscales: activity (two items), emotional, pain, social, and symptoms. The items are rated on a four-point Likert scale. The answers were summed to a total score (6–24), where a high score indicates a high quality of life [49]. All the questions needed to be answered in order to be included in the analysis. In the current study, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.88.

Statistics

For analysing the data, IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp) was used. A p-value of 0.05 was set to determine the significance. For categorical variables, frequencies and percentages were calculated to describe the data, and the chi-square test was used for analysing differences in proportions. Normally distributed ordinal variables were presented as mean with standard deviation, and an independent samples t-test was used to compare groups. Non-normally distributed ordinal variables were presented as median with first and third interquartile ranges, and a Mann-Whitney U-test was used to analyse differences between groups. Normal distribution was assessed using histograms and the Shapiro-Wilk test. Spearman’s correlation analysis was conducted between the subscales of illness perception, self-efficacy, adherence to medication treatment, and quality of life. A linear multiple regression was conducted with the significant variables from the Spearman’s correlation analysis and with QoL as a dependent variable. For variables with repeated measures, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyse differences, and the significant levels were adjusted with a manual Bonferroni correction. Missing data were handled according to pairwise deletion[50]. The questionnaires’ internal consistency was tested using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient.

Results

A total of 158 patients were included in the study, of which 133 patients continued participation at 6 months and 128 continued at 12 months, resulting in a response rate of 73.5% at baseline, 61.9% at 6 months, and 59.5% at 12 months (Fig. 1). The study population at 6 months consisted of 66 men and 67 women, with a mean age of 75 years (age range 47–92). In the comparison between men and women, a difference was shown in civil status, where living alone was more common among women (p < 0.001). No differences appeared in age, ABI, education level, or lifestyle factors between men and women. The background characteristics of the study sample at baseline are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Clinical characteristics, demographics, and lifestyle factors at baseline in subjects with intermittent claudication
Full size table

Illness perceptions

The participants reported what they believed caused their illness, namely, IC. Of the 110 participants that answered the question regarding the causal factors, smoking was the most reported (42.7%), followed by age (21.8%), genetics (9.1%), and no idea (7.3%).

Comparison between men and women

In an illness perception comparison between men and women, women reported higher illness coherence, indicating greater understanding of IC than men (p = 0.028). Women also reported higher emotional representations associated with IC (p = 0.047) compared to men (Table 3).

Comparison between sufficient and insufficient health literacy

Patients with sufficient health literacy reported less consequences (p = 0.003) and lower emotional representations (p = 0.001) of the IC than patients with insufficient health literacy. They also reported higher self-efficacy (p = 0.049) and higher QoL (p = 0.005) than patients with insufficient health literacy (Table 3).

Table 3 Differences between men and women and health literacy regarding illness perception, self-efficacy, adherence to medication treatment, and quality of life at six months in subjects with intermittent claudication
Full size table

Correlation

The subscales timeline (rs = − 0.24; p = 0.009), timeline cyclic (rs = − 0.19; p = 0.042), personal control (rs = − 0.19; p = 0.044), and emotional representations (rs = − 0.58; p < 0.001) correlated negatively with adherence to medication treatment, indicating that higher scores on these subscales were associated with lower adherence. The subscales treatment control (rs = 0.22; p = 0.016) and illness coherence (rs = 0.21; p = 0.028) correlated positively with adherence to medication treatment, indicating that higher scores on these subscales were associated with higher adherence (Table 4).

Quality of life

Positive associations were found between personal control and QoL (p < 0.001) and between self-efficacy and QoL (p = 0.014), indicating that higher scores were positively associated with higher QoL. A negative association was found between the consequences of the illness and QoL (p < 0.001) as well as between adherence to medication treatment and QoL (p = 0.013), indicating that experiences of higher consequences of IC and higher adherence to medication treatment were associated with lower QoL (Table 4).

Table 4 Spearman’s correlation analysis between illness perception, self-efficacy, adherence to medication treatment and quality of life in subjects with intermittent claudication
Full size table

Factors related to QoL

A multiple regression model explained 46.5% of the variance in QoL (adjusted R square = 0.465; p < 0.001) and showed that both consequences and adherence to medication treatment were negative predictors of QoL, meaning that one unit increase in these variables decreased QoL (Table 5).

Table 5 Multiple linear regression at six months with quality of life as dependent variable
Full size table

Changes over time

The QoL medians with inter quartile range (IQR) were 13 at baseline (11–17), 15 at 6 months (11–17), and 16 at 12 months (12–18.8). A significant increase in QoL was seen between baseline and 6 months (p = 0.033), baseline and 12 months (p < 0.001), and 6 months and 12 months (p = 0.031). After a correction for multiple comparisons (Bonferroni), the significant increase in QoL remained between baseline and 12 months (p = 0.003). No significant changes over time were seen in self-efficacy.

Discussion

The present study showed that illness perception differed in patients with IC in relation to sex and health literacy level. Patients’ self-reported beliefs on the causes of IC were smoking, age, and genetics. However, even if smoking was the most commonly reported causal beliefs for the disease (42%), the majority of the participants (89%) were current or former smokers. This is in line with a previous review on illness perception in patients with PAD, which showed that the patients had different beliefs regarding smoking as a causing factor for the disease; only some acknowledged smoking as a causing factor [19]. This has also been seen in patients with COPD, who expressed uncertainty about the connection between smoking and the disease [51]. The fact that 7.3% had no idea what caused their disease emphasizes a need to improve the patients’ awareness of the aetiology of the disease. As illness perception clearly influences patients’ beliefs about the causes of IC, an educational intervention addressing their perceptions could be one option to increase their awareness and, in turn, also their QoL. For example, previous research has shown that an illness perception correction-based educational programme provided via phone calls by a nurse improved QoL in patients with heart failure [52].

In a comparison between men and women concerning illness perception, women reported higher illness coherence and higher emotional representations, indicating they have greater understanding and greater emotional impact associated with IC compared to men. The difference in illness coherence contrasts with Al-Smadi et al.’s [53] review of illness perception in patients with coronary heart disease, where four studies [36, 54,55,56] reported no differences between men and women and two studies [57, 58] reported higher illness coherence in men than in women. The difference in emotional representation is in line with a review on sex differences in patients with chronic disease, where women experienced more negative stress about their condition compared to men [59]. Differences between men and women with PAD have also been studied earlier. A review showed that men and women differ in the presentation of PAD symptoms, where women more often present atypical symptoms and rest pain and, less often, IC symptoms [14]. Since differences between men and women with IC occur both in illness perception and symptom presentation, sex differences in IC patients should be further studied. Health care professionals’ awareness of potential sex differences could create preconditions for more individualized information, which could further improve the patients’ self-management of secondary prevention.

Patients with sufficient health literacy reported less consequences and lower emotional representations of the IC than patients with insufficient health literacy. This concurred with previous studies on patients with COPD and cardiovascular disease, which showed that those with insufficient health literacy also experienced more emotional representations [60, 61]. The current study also showed higher self-efficacy and higher QoL among patients with sufficient health literacy compared to those with insufficient health literacy, which is in line with previous research [62, 63]. These findings suggest that improving patients’ health literacy may improve their self-efficacy, which in turn may positively influence their QoL. Since health literacy can be improved by information and structured education, [64] patients with IC may benefit from a more active support from the health care system. Different methods – such as motivational interviewing, individual or group support, and in-person or web- or telephone-based support – have been beneficial for improving health literacy in patients with chronic diseases [65]. Further research is needed to assess these methods for improving health literacy in patients with IC. As previously suggested, digital formats may be more accessible for patients and perhaps more cost-effective, but they need both testing and evaluation among patients with IC.

Consequences and adherence to medication treatment were negative predictors of QoL in patients with IC. That the perceived consequences of the disease have an impact on daily life has earlier been confirmed in a review on patients with PAD; the patients experienced involuntary isolation and loss of independence due to their disease, which affected their self-image [19]. In this study, the association between increased adherence to medication treatment and decreased QoL is a surprising result in need of consideration. A possible explanation might be that pain and loss of independence have a negative impact on QoL in patients with IC [2]. Since BMT aims to prevent cardiovascular events and decrease the atherosclerotic progression rather than relieve IC symptoms, [1] high adherence to medications does not directly affect QoL. This negative association between adherence to treatment and QoL has also been reported earlier in a review on patients with COPD. According to Agh et al., [66] the treatment with inhaler therapy in COPD may affect the patient’s daily life due to perceived stigma when using inhalers in public, which could explain increased QoL with low adherence. However, this reason is not applicable to patients with IC since the treatment with BMT would not affect the patients’ daily life. Since adherence to taking antiplatelets and statins decreases after five years, [25, 26] future research with a longer perspective and, importantly, a combination of different methods to measure adherence would further illuminate associations between adherence and QoL in patient with IC. Another important aspect is that health care professionals should always remember to ask patients about their adherence behaviour since it is necessary information to enable evaluations of initiated treatment.

When examining changes over time, this study found a significant increase in QoL between baseline and 12 months despite no systematic secondary prevention support. This is an interesting finding that could be explained in a review on illness perception in patients with PAD: the patients experienced a process of adaptation, where they accepted their new situation and found other values in life [19]. This corresponds to the description of QoL as the discrepancy between an individual’s hopes and expectations and present experiences [67].

Even if the improvement in QoL was rather small, having knowledge of the reason for this increase despite no interactive care or support would be valuable in the process of creating a sustainable care for patients with IC. However, this was not possible with the current study design, so further research is needed, preferably with a qualitative approach that can describe the individual experiences. The fact that self-efficacy did not change over time was an expected result since managing chronic disease processes can be demanding and motivation can decrease over time [68]. Moreover, improvements in self-efficacy most likely require support to achieve, which Sol et al [33] have shown in patients with cardiovascular conditions. Even though QoL improved one year after visiting the outpatient clinic for vascular diseases, improving patients’ health literacy, self-efficacy, and illness perception is necessary to further improve the self-management of the disease. Most likely, patients with IC could benefit from better support to create more control and understanding in their process of managing the disease in order to maintain or increase their QoL. This could in turn be beneficial for secondary prevention, which is the first line of treatment. However, to be able to achieve this in clinical practice new strategies are needed. Positive experiences of nurse-led units in terms of increased awareness of their disease and increased motivation for initiating lifestyle changes has been shown among patients with IC [69]. This could be one option to improve patients’ self-management. Another way could be through self-management programmes, gaming, mobile applications, or social media [32]. However, future research is needed to evaluate these methods in relation to patients with IC.

Strengths and limitations

A strength of this study is that only validated instruments were used, thereby minimizing measurement bias. Another strength is that data extracted from medical records were used to describe medical status. However, a potential weakness is that all data from the questionnaires were self- reported, which can be inaccurate due to social desirability or failure to recollect adherence behaviour [70]. A validated instrument for evaluating physical activity would be preferable in future research. Since many of the patients scored maximum points in the adherence questionnaire, the potential ceiling effect needs to be considered. This makes it impossible to distinguish differences in adherence behaviour. Similar skewness in adherence reports has been found in previous studies [71,72,73]. Studies have shown self-reported questionnaire to overestimate patients’ adherence in other chronic conditions [74, 75]. Nevertheless, despite the limitation, self-reported medication adherence measures can provide valuable and useful information [70]. Further research on adherence in patients with IC is recommended, preferably using different research methods, such as refill-of-prescriptions records from pharmacies in combination with self-reported data.

The longitudinal design of the study enabled us to determine patterns over time. However, this study required the participants to fill in questionnaires on three occasions over one year. During this time, some of the participants decided to withdraw further participation. A further limitation might be that no power calculation was performed. The period of the data collection proceeded for two years in order to recruit as many participants as possible and was planned to continue. However, due to the pandemic, the recruitment had to stop earlier since patients with IC were not a prioritized group for care during this time, meaning that they were not called to visit the open clinic. Significant differences were found despite a somewhat small sample size; however, differences that were not detected may exist [76]. The internal consistency of the scales, which was measured through Cronbach’s alpha or psychometric tests, was appropriate (apart from MARS and in line with previous research [45, 54, 66]), which is to be considered a strength. The dropout rate during follow-up was acceptable, and patients ceasing to participate may be considered as an unavoidable attrition [77].

Conclusion

Illness perception differs in some aspects in relation to the level of health literacy as well as between men and women. Further, the level of health literacy seems to be of importance for patients’ self-efficacy and QoL. The current result suggest a need for new strategies to improve health literacy, illness perception, and self-efficacy over time – for example, by providing more tailored information regarding secondary prevention, preferably by using e-health tools, in order to strengthen self-management to further improve QoL in patients with IC.

Data availability

The dataset is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ABI:

Ankle brachial index

BMT:

Best medical therapy

CSM:

Common Sense Model

HLS-EU:

European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire

HLS-EU-Q16-SE:

European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire 16 Swedish

IC:

Intermittent claudication

IPQ-R:

The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire

IQR:

Inter quartile range

MARS-5:

Medication Adherence Report Scale

PAD:

Peripheral arterial disease

QoL:

Quality of life

S-GSE:

General Self-Efficacy Scale

VascuQoL:

Vascular Quality of Life Questionnaire

VQ6:

Vascular Quality of Life Questionnaire-6

References

  1. Aboyans V, Ricco JB, Bartelink MEL et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteriesEndorsed by: the European Stroke Organization (ESO)The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur Heart J. Mar 1 2018;39(9):763–816. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx095.

  2. Abaraogu UO, Ezenwankwo EF, Dall PM, Seenan CA. Living a burdensome and demanding life: a qualitative systematic review of the patients experiences of peripheral arterial disease. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(11):e0207456. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207456.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Patel KK, Jones PG, Ellerbeck EF, et al. Underutilization of evidence-based Smoking Cessation support strategies despite high smoking addiction Burden in Peripheral Artery Disease Specialty Care: insights from the International PORTRAIT Registry. J Am Heart Assoc. Oct 2018;16(20):e010076. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.118.010076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Harwood AE, Pymer S, Ibeggazene S, Ingle L, Caldow E, Birkett ST. Provision of exercise services in patients with peripheral artery disease in the United Kingdom. Vascular Aug. 2021;4:17085381211035259. https://doi.org/10.1177/17085381211035259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cronin CT, McCartan DP, McMonagle M, Cross KS, Dowdall JF. Peripheral artery disease: a marked lack of awareness in Ireland. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg May. 2015;49(5):556–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.12.017.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lovell M, Harris K, Forbes T, et al. Peripheral arterial disease: lack of awareness in Canada. Can J Cardiol Jan. 2009;25(1):39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0828-282x(09)70021-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Petrie KJ, Weinman J. Why illness perceptions matter. Clin Med (Lond). Nov-Dec. 2006;6(6):536–9. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.6-6-536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ashour A, Al-Smadi A, Shajrawi A, Al-Rawashdeh S, Alshraifeen A, Abed M. Changes in illness perception among patients’ undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart Lung Nov-Dec. 2020;49(6):836–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2020.08.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Petrie KJ, Cameron LD, Ellis CJ, Buick D, Weinman J. Changing illness perceptions after myocardial infarction: an early intervention randomized controlled trial. Psychosom Med Jul-Aug. 2002;64(4):580–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-200207000-00007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Rakhshan M, Rahimi M, Zarshenas L. The Effect of an Education Program based on illness perception on the lifestyle of patients with metabolic syndrome: a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery Oct. 2019;7(4):279–87. https://doi.org/10.30476/ijcbnm.2019.81658.0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Song P, Rudan D, Zhu Y, et al. Global, regional, and national prevalence and risk factors for peripheral artery disease in 2015: an updated systematic review and analysis. Lancet Glob Health Aug. 2019;7(8):e1020–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(19)30255-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fowkes FG, Rudan D, Rudan I, et al. Comparison of global estimates of prevalence and risk factors for peripheral artery disease in 2000 and 2010: a systematic review and analysis. Lancet Oct. 2013;19(9901):1329–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)61249-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sartipy F, Sigvant B, Lundin F, Wahlberg E. Ten year mortality in different peripheral arterial Disease Stages: a Population based Observational Study on Outcome. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Apr. 2018;55(4):529–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2018.01.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Porras CP, Bots ML, Teraa M, van Doorn S, Vernooij RWM. Differences in Symptom Presentation in Women and Men with confirmed Lower Limb Peripheral Artery Disease: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Apr. 2022;63(4):602–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.12.039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Krack G, Holle R, Kirchberger I, Kuch B, Amann U, Seidl H. Determinants of adherence and effects on health-related quality of life after myocardial infarction: a prospective cohort study. BMC Geriatr Jun. 2018;7(1):136. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-018-0827-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Majeed A, Rehman M, Hussain I, et al. The impact of treatment adherence on quality of life among type 2 diabetes Mellitus Patients - Findings from a cross-sectional study. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2021;15:475–81. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.S295012.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Uchmanowicz B, Chudiak A, Mazur G. The influence of quality of life on the level of adherence to therapeutic recommendations among elderly hypertensive patients. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018;12:2593–603. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.S182172.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Foxwell R, Morley C, Frizelle D. Illness perceptions, mood and quality of life: a systematic review of coronary heart disease patients. J Psychosom Res Sep. 2013;75(3):211–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2013.05.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Striberger R, Axelsson M, Zarrouk M, Kumlien C. Illness perceptions in patients with peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Int J Nurs Stud Apr. 2021;116:103723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Leventhal H, Meyer D, Nerenz D. The common sense representation of illness danger. The Common Sense Representation of Illness Danger. 1980;01/01:17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mosleh SM, Almalik MM. Illness perception and adherence to healthy behaviour in jordanian coronary heart disease patients. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs Jun. 2016;15(4):223–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515114563885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Thagizadeh A, Ghahramanian A, Zamanzadeh V, Aslanabadi N, Onyeka TC, Ramazanzadeh N. Illness perception and cardiovascular risk factors in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in Iran. BMC Cardiovasc Disord Jun. 2022;2(1):245. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-022-02684-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dopheide JF, Veit J, Ramadani H, et al. Adherence to statin therapy favours survival of patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother Jul. 2021;23(4):263–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvz081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kumbhani DJ, Steg PG, Cannon CP, et al. Adherence to secondary prevention medications and four-year outcomes in outpatients with atherosclerosis. Am J Med. Aug 2013;126(8):693–700e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2013.01.033.

  25. Wawruch M, Wimmer G Jr, Murin J, et al. Patient-Associated characteristics influencing the risk for Non-Persistence with Statins in older patients with peripheral arterial disease. Drugs Aging Sep. 2019;36(9):863–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-019-00689-2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Wawruch M, Murin J, Tesar T, et al. Non-Persistence with Antiplatelet Medications among older patients with peripheral arterial disease. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:687549. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.687549.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Burkhart PV, Sabaté E. Adherence to long-term therapies: evidence for action. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2003;35(3):207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Unni E, Bae S. Exploring a New Theoretical Model to explain the behavior of Medication Adherence. Pharmacy (Basel). Apr. 2022;1(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy10020043.

  29. Striberger R, Axelsson M, Kumlien C, Zarrouk M. Health literacy in patients with intermittent claudication in relation to clinical characteristics, demographics, self-efficacy and quality of life - A cross-sectional study. J Vasc Nurs Sep. 2022;40(3):121–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvn.2022.09.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Self-efficacy in changing societies. Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press; 1995:xv, 334-xv, 334.

  31. Collins TC, Lunos S, Ahluwalia JS. Self-efficacy is associated with walking ability in persons with diabetes mellitus and peripheral arterial disease. Vasc Med Jun. 2010;15(3):189–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1358863x10362604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Farley H. Promoting self-efficacy in patients with chronic disease beyond traditional education: a literature review. Nurs Open Jan. 2020;7(1):30–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sol BGM, van der Graaf Y, van Petersen R, Visseren FLJ. The Effect of Self-Efficacy on Cardiovascular Lifestyle. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2011;10(3):180–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2010.06.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Byrne M, Walsh J, Murphy AW. Secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: patient beliefs and health-related behaviour. J Psychosom Res May. 2005;58(5):403–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2004.11.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Moss-Morris R, Weinman J, Petrie K, Horne R, Cameron L, Buick D. The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R). Psychology & Health. 2002/01/01 2002;17(1):1–16. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440290001494.

  36. Brink E, Alsén P, Cliffordson C. Validation of the revised illness perception questionnaire (IPQ-R) in a sample of persons recovering from myocardial infarction–the swedish version. Scand J Psychol Dec. 2011;52(6):573–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2011.00901.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. JM P, VdB KGS, Okan KS. O. Measuring healthliteracy in Europe: introducing the european health literacy Survey Question-naire (HLS-EU-Q). In: editors. International Handbook of health literacy research practice andpolicy across the lifespan. vol 2019.69 Bristol: Policy Press; 2019.

  38. Wångdahl J, Lytsy P, Mårtensson L, Westerling R. Health literacy among refugees in Sweden - a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health Oct. 2014;3:14:1030. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sørensen K, Pelikan JM, Röthlin F, et al. Health literacy in Europe: comparative results of the european health literacy survey (HLS-EU). Eur J Public Health Dec. 2015;25(6):1053–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckv043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON. Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. J Weinman, S Wright, & M Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio Causal and control beliefs (pp 35–37) 1995;Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.

  41. Koskinen-Hagman MSR, Jerusalem M. Swedish version of the General Self-Efficacy Scale. 1999.

  42. Löve J, Moore CD, Hensing G. Validation of the swedish translation of the General Self-Efficacy scale. Qual Life Res Sep. 2012;21(7):1249–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-0030-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bäck A, Sundell KA, Horne R, Landén M, Mårdby A-CM. The Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) in a swedish sample with bipolar disorder - a pilot study. Int J Person-Centered Med. 2012;2:263–70.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Horne R, Weinman J. Self-regulation and Self-management in Asthma: Exploring The Role of Illness Perceptions and Treatment Beliefs in Explaining Non-adherence to Preventer Medication. Psychology & Health - PSYCHOL HEALTH. 02/01 2002;17:17–32. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440290001502.

  45. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ Jun. 2011;27:2:53–5. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Morgan MB, Crayford T, Murrin B, Fraser SC. Developing the vascular quality of Life Questionnaire: a new disease-specific quality of life measure for use in lower limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg Apr. 2001;33(4):679–87. https://doi.org/10.1067/mva.2001.112326.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Nordanstig J, Karlsson J, Pettersson M, Wann-Hansson C. Psychometric properties of the disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument VascuQoL in a swedish setting. Health Qual Life Outcomes Apr. 2012;30:10:45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-10-45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Kumlien C, Nordanstig J, Lundström M, Pettersson M. Validity and test retest reliability of the vascular quality of life Questionnaire-6: a short form of a disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for patients with peripheral arterial disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes Sep. 2017;29(1):187. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0762-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nordanstig J, Wann-Hansson C, Karlsson J, Lundström M, Pettersson M, Morgan MB. Vascular quality of Life Questionnaire-6 facilitates health-related quality of life assessment in peripheral arterial disease. J Vasc Surg Mar. 2014;59(3):700–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2013.08.099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kang H. The prevention and handling of the missing data. Korean J Anesthesiol May. 2013;64(5):402–6. https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2013.64.5.402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. van Eerd EA, Risør MB, van Rossem CR, van Schayck OC, Kotz D. Experiences of tobacco smoking and quitting in smokers with and without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-a qualitative analysis. BMC Fam Pract Nov. 2015;4:16:164. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0382-y.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Sadeghi Akbari A, Cheraghi MA, Kazemnejad A, Nomali M, Zakerimoghadam M. Effect of illness perception correction - based Educational Program on Quality of Life and Self- Care in patients with heart failure: a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Caring Sci Jun. 2019;8(2):89–93. https://doi.org/10.15171/jcs.2019.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Al-Smadi AM, Ashour A, Hweidi I, Gharaibeh B, Fitzsimons D. Illness perception in patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Pract Dec. 2016;22(6):633–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.12494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Alsén P, Brink E, Persson LO, Brändström Y, Karlson BW. Illness perceptions after myocardial infarction: relations to fatigue, emotional distress, and health-related quality of life. J Cardiovasc Nurs Mar-Apr. 2010;25(2):E1–e10. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCN.0b013e3181c6dcfd.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Grace SL, Krepostman S, Brooks D, et al. Illness perceptions among cardiac patients: relation to depressive symptomatology and sex. J Psychosom Res Sep. 2005;59(3):153–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.05.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Yan J, You LM, He JG, et al. Illness perception among chinese patients with acute myocardial infarction. Patient Educ Couns Dec. 2011;85(3):398–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2010.11.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Bergman E, Malm D, Karlsson JE, Berterö C. Longitudinal study of patients after myocardial infarction: sense of coherence, quality of life, and symptoms. Heart Lung Mar-Apr. 2009;38(2):129–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2008.05.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Bergman E, Malm D, Berterö C, Karlsson JE. Does one’s sense of coherence change after an acute myocardial infarction? A two-year longitudinal study in Sweden. Nurs Health Sci Jun. 2011;13(2):156–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2018.2011.00592.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Vlassoff C. Gender differences in determinants and consequences of health and illness. J Health Popul Nutr Mar. 2007;25(1):47–61.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Kale MS, Federman AD, Krauskopf K, et al. The Association of Health literacy with illness and medication beliefs among patients with chronic obstructive Pulmonary Disease. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(4):e0123937. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123937.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Walters R, Leslie SJ, Sixsmith J, Gorely T. Health literacy for Cardiac Rehabilitation: an examination of Associated illness perceptions, Self-Efficacy, motivation and physical activity. Int J Environ Res Public Health Nov. 2020;20(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228641.

  62. Xu XY, Leung AYM, Chau PH, Health Literacy. Self-Efficacy, and Associated factors among patients with diabetes. Health Lit Res Pract Apr. 2018;2(2):e67–e77. https://doi.org/10.3928/24748307-20180313-01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Panagioti M, Skevington SM, Hann M, et al. Effect of health literacy on the quality of life of older patients with long-term conditions: a large cohort study in UK general practice. Qual Life Res May. 2018;27(5):1257–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1775-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Nutbeam D, McGill B, Premkumar P. Improving health literacy in community populations: a review of progress. Health Promot Int. Oct 1 2018;33(5):901–911. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dax015.

  65. Taggart J, Williams A, Dennis S, et al. A systematic review of interventions in primary care to improve health literacy for chronic disease behavioral risk factors. BMC Fam Pract Jun 1. 2012;13:49. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-13-49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Ágh T, Dömötör P, Bártfai Z, Inotai A, Fujsz E, Mészáros Á. Relationship between Medication Adherence and Health-Related quality of life in subjects with COPD: a systematic review. Respir Care Feb. 2015;60(2):297–303. https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.03123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Calman KC. Quality of life in cancer patients–an hypothesis. J Med Ethics Sep. 1984;10(3):124–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.10.3.124.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Devan H, Hale L, Hempel D, Saipe B, Perry MA. What Works and Does Not Work in a Self-Management Intervention for People With Chronic Pain? Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis. Phys Ther. May 1 2018;98(5):381–397. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzy029.

  69. Haile S, Lööf H, Johansson UB, Linné A, Joelsson-Alm E. Increasing patients’ awareness of their own health: experiences of participating in follow-up programs after surgical treatment for intermittent claudication. J Vasc Nurs Mar. 2022;40(1):47–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvn.2021.11.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Stirratt MJ, Dunbar-Jacob J, Crane HM, et al. Self-report measures of medication adherence behavior: recommendations on optimal use. Transl Behav Med Dec. 2015;5(4):470–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-015-0315-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. George J, Kong DC, Thoman R, Stewart K. Factors associated with medication nonadherence in patients with COPD. Chest Nov. 2005;128(5):3198–204. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.128.5.3198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Menckeberg TT, Bouvy ML, Bracke M, et al. Beliefs about medicines predict refill adherence to inhaled corticosteroids. J Psychosom Res Jan. 2008;64(1):47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2007.07.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Axelsson M, Brink E, Lundgren J, Lötvall J. The influence of personality traits on reported adherence to medication in individuals with chronic disease: an epidemiological study in West Sweden. PLoS One Mar. 2011;28(3):e18241. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018241.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Brown MT, Bussell J, Dutta S, Davis K, Strong S, Mathew S. Medication adherence: Truth and Consequences. Am J Med Sci Apr. 2016;351(4):387–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjms.2016.01.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Tommelein E, Mehuys E, Van Tongelen I, Brusselle G, Boussery K. Accuracy of the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) as a quantitative measure of adherence to inhalation medication in patients with COPD. Ann Pharmacother May. 2014;48(5):589–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060028014522982.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Mascha EJ, Vetter TR, Significance. Errors, Power, and sample size: the blocking and tackling of Statistics. Anesth Analg Feb. 2018;126(2):691–8. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000002741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Caruana EJ, Roman M, Hernández-Sánchez J, Solli P. Longitudinal studies. J Thorac Dis Nov. 2015;7(11):E537–40. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.10.63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Human Experimentation. Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki). Can Med Assoc J Sep. 1964;12(11):619.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research team is grateful to the individuals with IC who generously gave their time to participate in the study.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.

Open access funding provided by Malmö University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, SE-20506, Sweden

    Rebecka Striberger, Christine Kumlien & Malin Axelsson

  2. Vascular Centre, Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden

    Rebecka Striberger, Moncef Zarrouk & Christine Kumlien

  3. Department of Clinical Sciences, Malmö, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden

    Moncef Zarrouk

Authors
  1. Rebecka Striberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Moncef Zarrouk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christine Kumlien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Malin Axelsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All the authors (RS, MZ, CK, and MA) have participated in the design, planning, and development of the study. RS was responsible for the data collection. The analysis was conducted by RS and MA, and all authors took part in the interpretation of the results. RS drafted the manuscript, and CK, MZ, and MA reviewed and contributed with important intellectual content. The authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecka Striberger.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Lund, Sweden (Dnr 2017/609). All participants received oral and written information about the study, including information that it was voluntary to participate and that they could withdraw their participation at any time with no further explanation. They also received information that this study did not include any compensation for participation. Informed consent was obtained from all participants. The questionnaires were coded and the keycode was only available for the research team ensuring confidentiality. All methods conducted adhered to the relevant guidelines and regulations in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki [78].

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Striberger, R., Zarrouk, M., Kumlien, C. et al. Illness perception, health literacy, self-efficacy, adherence and quality of life in patients with intermittent claudication – a longitudinal cohort study. BMC Nurs 22, 167 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01329-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01329-2

Keywords

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

Contact us