Search

Objectives Both pre-hospital decision delay - the time patients wait before seeking medical attention after symptoms have started - and high psychological distress after the cardiac episode predict poor prognosis of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We aimed to identify psychosocial markers of these prognostic factors. Design A cross-sectional study of 102 consecutive, clinically stable ACS survivors. Methods Participants completed a questionnaire measuring pre-hospital decision delay, psychological distress, and several known psychosocial factors related to cardiovascular health: type D personality, resilience, social support, and concerns during the cardiac event. Multiple linear regression and mediation analyses were conducted. Results Type D personality and fewer concerns about the serious consequences of delaying help-seeking were related to more psychological distress post-ACS, and these relationships were mediated by longer pre-hospital decision delay. In contrast, resilience was related to lower psychological distress. Social support and social concerns about help-seeking were not related to the outcome variables. Conclusions Type D personality may be a risk factor for more delayed help-seeking for an ACS and higher psychological distress after the cardiac event. Resilience, in contrast, emerged as a potential protective factor of patients' mental health after the cardiac event. Pre-hospital decision delay was related to thinking about serious consequences (e.g., complications, protecting one's family) but not about social concerns (e.g., wasting other people's time) during the cardiac episode. Statement of Contribution What is already known on this subject? Longer pre-hospital decision delay, that is waiting longer to seek medical attention after symptoms have started, predicts poor prognosis of acute coronary syndrome patients. High psychological distress post-ACS, such as the development of anxiety and/or depression, also predicts poor prognosis of these patients. What does this study adds? This study identifies several psychosocial markers of longer prehospital decision delay and high psychological distress post-ACS. Prehospital decision delay was related to thinking about serious consequences (e.g., complications, protecting one's family) but not about social concerns (e.g., wasting other people's time) during the cardiac episode. Type D personality and fewer concerns about the serious consequences of delaying help-seeking were related to more psychological distress, and these relationships were mediated by longer prehospital decision delay. Resilience was related to lower psychological distress post-ACS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many patients delay seeking medical attention during acute coronary syndromes (ACS), profoundly increasing their risk for death and major disability. Although research has identified several risk factors, efforts to improve patient decision making have generally been unsuccessful, prompting a call for more research into psychological factors.Purpose: The purpose of this study is to estimate the relationship between ACS decision delay and numeracy, a factor closely related to general decision making skill and risk literacy.Methods: About 5 days after experiencing ACS, 102 survivors (mean age = 58, 32-74) completed a questionnaire including measures of numeracy, decision delay, and other relevant factors (e.g., anxiety, depression, symptom severity, knowledge, demographics).Results: Low patient numeracy was related to longer decision delay, OR = 0.64 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.44, 0.92], which was in turn related to higher odds of positive troponin on arrival at the hospital, OR = 1.37 [95 % CI 1.01, 2.01]. Independent of the influence of all other assessed factors, a patient with high (vs. low) numeracy was about four times more likely to seek medical attention within the critical first hour after symptom onset (i.e., ORhigh-low = 3.84 [1.127, 11.65]).Conclusions: Numeracy may be one of the largest decision delay risk factors identified to date. Results accord with theories emphasizing potentially pivotal roles of patient deliberation, denial, and outcome understanding during decision making. Findings suggest that brief numeracy assessments may predict which patients are at greater risk for life-threatening decision delay and may also facilitate the design of risk communications that are appropriate for diverse patients who vary in risk literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]