Trajectories of perceived social support in acute coronary syndrome
Perceived social support is known to be an important predictor of health outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This study investigates patterns of longitudinal trajectories of patient-reported perceived social support in individuals with ACS.
Data are from 3013 patients from the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease registry who had their first cardiac catheterization between 2004 and 2011. Perceived social support was assessed using the 19-item Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOS) 2 weeks, 1 year, and 3 years post catheterization. Group-based trajectory analysis based on longitudinal multiple imputation model was used to identify distinct subgroups of trajectories of perceived social support over a 3-year follow-up period.
Three distinct social support trajectory subgroups were identified, namely: “High” social support group (60%), “Intermediate” social support group (30%), and “Low” social support subgroup (10%). Being female (OR = 1.67; 95% CI = [1.18–2.36]), depression (OR = 8.10; 95% CI = [4.27–15.36]) and smoking (OR = 1.70; 95% CI = [1.23–2.35]) were predictors of the differences among these trajectory subgroups.
Although the majority of ACS patients showed increased or fairly stable trajectories of social support, about 10% of the cohort reported declining social support. These findings can inform targeted psycho-social interventions to improve their perceived social support and health outcomes.
KeywordsPerceived social support Patient-reported outcome Acute coronary syndrome Longitudinal trajectories
This research was supported by the University of Calgary O’Brien Institute of Public Health.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there’s no conflict of interest.
Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (REB14-1320).
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects included in the study.
- 6.Dekker, R. L., Peden, A. R., Lennie, T. A., Schooler, M. P., & Moser, D. K. (2009). Living with depressive symptoms: Patients with heart failure. American journal of critical care: An Official Publication. American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, 18(4), 310–318. https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2009672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Valtorta, N. K., Kanaan, M., Gilbody, S., Ronzi, S., & Hanratty, B. (2016). Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for coronary heart disease and stroke: Systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal observational studies. Heart, 102(13), 1009–1016. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2015-308790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Hakulinen, C., Pulkki-Raback, L., Virtanen, M., Jokela, M., Kivimaki, M., & Elovainio, M. (2018). Social isolation and loneliness as risk factors for myocardial infarction, stroke and mortality: UK Biobank cohort study of 479 054 men and women. Heart, 104(18), 1536–1542. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Holden, L., Lee, C., Hockey, R., Ware, R. S., & Dobson, A. J. (2015). Longitudinal analysis of relationships between social support and general health in an Australian population cohort of young women. Quality of Life Research, 24(2), 485–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0774-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Bosworth, H. B., Siegler, I. C., Olsen, M. K., Brummett, B. H., Barefoot, J. C., Williams, R. B., et al. (2000). Social support and quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 9(7), 829–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Norris, C. M., Spertus, J. A., Jensen, L., Johnson, J., Hegadoren, K. M., Ghali, W. A., et al. (2008). Sex and gender discrepancies in health-related quality of life outcomes among patients with established coronary artery disease. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 1(2), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.108.793448 Google Scholar
- 16.Leifheit-Limson, E. C., Reid, K. J., Kasl, S. V., Lin, H., Jones, P. G., Buchanan, D. M., et al. (2010). The role of social support in health status and depressive symptoms after acute myocardial infarction: Evidence for a stronger relationship among women. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 3(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.109.899815.Google Scholar
- 17.Ghali, W. A., Knudtson, M. L., & on behalf of the APPROACH Investigators. (2000). Overview of the alberta provincial project for outcome assessment in coronary heart disease. The Canadian Journal of Cardiology, 16(10), 1225–1230.Google Scholar
- 20.Robitaille, A., Orpana, H., & McIntosh, C. N. (2011). Psychometric properties, factorial structure, and measurement invariance of the English and French versions of the Medical Outcomes Study social support scale. Health Reports, 22(2), 33–40.Google Scholar
- 25.Ma, J., Raina, P., Beyene, J., & Thabane, L. (2012). Comparing the performance of different multiple imputation strategies for missing binary outcomes in cluster randomized trials: A simulation study. Journal of Open Access Medical Statistics, 2, 93–103.Google Scholar
- 30.Nagin, D. S., & Odgers, C. L. (2010). Group-based trajectory modeling in clinical research. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 109–138. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.SAS Institute Inc. (2013). Base SAS® 9.4 procedures guide: Statistical procedures. Cary: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
- 36.Dean, A., Matt, G. E., & Wood, P. (1992). The effects of widowhood on social support from significant others. Journal of Community Psychology, 20(4), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6629(199210)20:43.0.CO;2-V.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Garnefski, N., Kraaij, V., Schroevers, M. J., Aarnink, J., van der Heijden, D. J., van Es, S. M., et al. (2009). Cognitive coping and goal adjustment after first-time myocardial infarction: Relationships with symptoms of depression. Behavioral Medicine (Washington, D. C.), 35(3), 79–86, https://doi.org/10.1080/08964280903232068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar