Purpose/objective: Two complementary frameworks, the common sense model, and social-cognitive theory, were used. The first purpose of this study was to compare 2 groups varying in their illness perceptions (strong vs. weak) on baseline differences in theory-based exercise cognitions (self-regulatory efficacy and outcome expectations), and health-related quality of life (HRQL). The second purpose was to examine illness perception group differences in cardiac rehabilitation exercise participation following 3 months of exercise therapy.
Research method/design: Newly enrolled cardiac rehabilitation participants (N = 49) completed baseline measures of illness perceptions, self-regulatory efficacy, outcome expectations, and HRQL. Cardiac rehabilitation exercise minutes were measured at baseline (after 2 weeks of participation) and following 3 months of cardiac rehabilitation.
Results: Individuals were successfully classified into strong and weak illness perception groups using cluster analysis. Analyses of variance indicated significant group differences on negative outcome expectations (p < .05), where the strong illness perception group reported greater negative outcome expectations. The strong illness perception group also reported significantly lower physical and mental HRQL as compared to their weak illness perception counterparts (p < .01). Parallel differences in cardiac rehabilitation exercise participation at 3 months were also observed (p < .05).
Conclusions/implications: This study was a first attempt to utilize the common sense model and social-cognitive theory to examine individuals engaged in rehabilitation to reduce cardiac risk. The findings suggest that complementary use of these 2 frameworks to study individual illness perception differences relative to psychological beliefs and adherence to exercise therapy may aid understanding of correlates of exercise adherence among cardiac rehabilitation participants.
(c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).