Thesis

Chapter 5 118 FIGURE 2. CONSORT Flowchart. *Percentage of participants allocated to condition. Primary Outcome As compared with the control group, the IMR group showed a statistically significant improvement in the primary outcome measure (illness self-management measured with the client version of the IMR scale; p = 0.048) (Table 2). The largest improvement, though still with a small effect size, was shown at follow-up (Table 3). *Percentage of participants allocated to condition. Assessed for eligibity (n= 238) Excluded (n=51) • Declined to participate (n=35) • Mental or somatic condition (n=7) • Not contacted (n=5) • Other reasons (n=4) Completed 12M interview (n=58; 82%*) Lost to follow up (n=10; 14%*) + Missed assessments (n=3; 4%*) = (n=13; 18%*) • Withdrawal (personal reasons) (n=10; 77%) • Could not locate (reasons unknown) (n=2; 15%) • Impairment psychiatric condition (n=1; 8%) Completed 12M interview (n=99; 85%*) Lost to follow up (n=12; 10%*) + Missed assessments (n=5; 4%*) = (n=17; 15%*) • Withdrawal (personal reasons) (n=7; 41%) • Could not locate (reasons unknown) (n=6; 35%) • Impairment psychiatric condition (n=4; 24%) Completed 18M interview (n=61; 86%*) Lost to follow up (n= 10; 14%*) • Withdrawal (personal reasons) (n=9; 90%) • Impairment psychiatric condition (n=1; 10%) Completed 18M interview (n=104; 90%*) Lost to follow up (n= 12; 10%*) • Withdrawal (personal reasons) (n=8; 67%) • Could not locate (reasons unknown) (n=2; 17%) • Impairment psychiatric condition (n=2; 17%) Analyzed (n=71, 100%*) • Excluded from analysis (n=0, 0%*) Analyzed (n=116, 100%*) • Excluded from analysis (n=0, 0%*) Randomized (n= 187) (baseline measurement) Allocated to IMR (n= 116; 62%) • Received at least 1 session of IMR (n=95; 82%*) • Received at least 50% of IMR sessions (n=57; 49%*) • Did not receive any IMR (n=21; 18%*) Allocated to CAU (n=71; 38%) Enrollment Allocation 18 M Follow-Up Analysis 12 M Follow-Up

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw