BACKGROUNDSelf-management education, as a non-pharmacological intervention, aims to help epilepsy patients better control their condition and improve their quality of life. While some studies have shown that self-management education is beneficial for epilepsy patients, its specific effects still require systematic evaluation.OBJECTIVEThis study aims to comprehensively assess the impact of self-management education on the quality of life and recurrence frequency of epilepsy patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis.METHODSThis study systematically reviewed literature on self-management education for epilepsy patients from 2014 to 2024. Computer searches were conducted in PubMed, Wiley Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and CNKI databases, covering the period from January 1, 2014, to August 31, 2024, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two independent reviewers screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias according to predefined criteria. The primary outcome measures included scores from the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) for anxiety and depression, the Epilepsy Self-Efficacy Scale (ESES), the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory (QOLIE-31), the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS), the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and the Epilepsy Knowledge Questionnaire (EKP).RESULTSA total of 9 RCTs involving 1094 patients were included after searching six databases. The results showed that self-management education significantly improved the quality of life of epilepsy patients (SMD = 0.56, 95 % CI [-0.05; 0.18]) and significantly reduced anxiety (SMD = -0.41, 95 % CI [-0.58; -0.23]) and depression symptoms (SMD = -0.40, 95 % CI [-0.76; -0.05]). Additionally, self-management education significantly enhanced patients' self-efficacy in managing seizures (SMD = 0.32, 95 % CI [0.12; 0.52]).CONCLUSIONSelf-management education can effectively improve the quality of life and mental health of epilepsy patients, enhancing their ability to cope with the disease, and provides strong evidence for clinical practice. However, due to the high heterogeneity among studies, more high-quality RCTs are needed to further validate these findings.