The mean score for self efficacy was 2.23 (95% CI 2.20 - 2.27) Almost half of the respondents (46%) reported taking one or more preventive measures, with 36% reporting to have stayed away from (wild) birds or poultry, 26% not going to areas where AI was present and 2% buying antiviral drugs (see Table 3).
17 Secondary pre-specified outcomes were the change in chronic respiratory questionnaire domain scores, exacerbation frequency and management as recorded with an automated call system, and total and five domain scores for self efficacy as measured with the COPD self-efficacy scale.
Mean scores for provider efficacy and CVP-related attitudes were moderate to high.
Table 1 shows the demographics of the groups, along with depression parameters, comorbidities, and baseline scores for the efficacy variables.
The scores for other efficacy assessments were similar to the values observed at weeks 54 and 102.
At follow-up, the secondary outcomes; scores for self efficacy (intervention mean 69.49, s.d. 12.55 vs. control mean 52.08 s.d.21.172, p < 0.001) and knowledge (intervention mean 12.97, s.d.2.83, control mean 10.55, s.d. 3.92, p < 0.001), were significantly higher in the intervention group after adjusting for baseline differences using analysis of covariance (table 3).
The mean score for general self-efficacy was 30, indicating a low level of self-confidence.
This is because all the entrepreneurs had high scores for self-efficacy (27 from a total of 40).
However, while post-test scores for self-efficacy expectation were high, qualitative data suggest that over time maintaining this skill was a challenge.
Adjusted mean scores for self-efficacy and QoL in both groups and between groups adjusted mean difference are shown in Table 2.
Pre-test mean scores for self-efficacy, quality of life, blood pressure, interdialytic weight gain and laboratory results did not differ between the groups.
