Search

Compassion towards oneself and towards others has been associated with positive psychological outcomes, however, research is limited by the availability of valid psychometric measures, particularly in languages other than English. The current study translated (English to French) and validated the following measures: the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales (CEAS), assessing self-compassion (CEAS-SC), compassion to others (CEAS-TO), and compassion from others (CEAS-FROM); the Compassion Scale (CS); and the Sussex-Oxford Compassion Scales for Self (SOCS-S) and Others (SOCS-O). French-speaking participants were recruited online (N = 384) and completed the translated measures as well as questionnaires assessing self-compassion, depression, anxiety, stress, insecure attachment, mindfulness, and well-being. Confirmatory Factor Analysis supports the original factor structures proposed for the CEAS-FROM (two-factor hierarchical), CS (four-factor hierarchical), SOCS-S and SOCS-O (five-factor hierarchical), with alternate factor structures proposed for CEAS-SC (three-factor) and CEAS-TO (two-factor). Results showed good internal consistency and convergent validity for all scales, supporting the use of total scores for the translated measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dermatology consultations in Québec, Canada, face accessibility challenges, with most dermatologists concentrated in urban areas. Teledermatology, offering remote diagnosis and treatment, holds promise in overcoming these limitations. However, concerns regarding patient-doctor relationships and logistical issues exist. Objectives: This article aims to introduce a dermatology patient learning pathway (PLP) developed by the Centre of Excellence on Partnership with Patients and the Public (CEPPP), focusing on knowledge, abilities, and skills mobilized by patients and their loved ones at key moments of the life course with an illness, as well as emerging educational needs. Methods: The PLP development was co-developed with dermatology patient and caregiver partners, stakeholders, and the CEPPP team. The process encompassed stakeholder engagement, exploration, recruitment of patient and caregiver partners, co-development of the PLP draft, and validation through consensus building. Results: The PLP methodology led to the creation of 44 learning objectives, comprising a total of 107 subobjectives. These objectives were organized into 8 phases of the patient life course with a dermatological condition: (1) prevention and predisposition; (2) discovery, self-examination, or observation of a change; (3) first consultation; (4) wandering; (5) consultation with a dermatologist; (6) diagnosis; (7) treatments; and (8) living with it. Conclusions: The dermatology PLP serves as a resource outlining patient competency across different stages of managing a dermatological condition throughout their life course. In the context of teledermatology, the PLP might facilitate patient and caregiver engagement by helping select appropriate information and tools to support active participation in care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Stress can have paradoxical effects on pain, namely hyperalgesia and hypoalgesia. Four situational characteristics activate the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis, leading to a physiological stress response: lacking Sense of control, social-evaluative Threat, Unpredictability and Novelty (STUN). This scoping review reports on the types of evidence published on the effects of STUN characteristics on pain outcomes. Databases/Data Treatment: Searches of primary electronic databases were performed to identify articles published on adults between 1990 and 2021 that contained search terms on pain and stress/STUN characteristics. A total of 329 articles were included in the analysis. Results: Only 3.3% of studies examined simultaneously > 1 STUN component. Almost all observational studies (177/180) examined the association between perceived stress and pain without measuring physiological stress responses. Of the 130 experimental studies, 78 (60.0%) manipulated stressful characteristics through nociception, and only 38.5% assessed if/how stress manipulation impacted perceived stress. Conclusion: There is a clear lack of integration of the characteristics that trigger a physiological stress response in the pain field. Only 3.3% of studies examined simultaneously more than one STUN component and there is an unequal attention given to individual components of the STUN framework. Recommendations for future research include selection of stress manipulations/measurements that are more precisely inducing/reflecting neurobiological mechanisms of stress responses to insure valid integration of scientific knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To identify tools that predict the risk of complications in patients presenting to outpatient clinics or emergency departments (ED) with acute infectious diarrhea.Methods: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and CINAHL were searched from inception to July 2021. Articles reporting on the derivation or validation of a score to stratify the risk of intravenous rehydration or hospitalization among patients with acute infectious diarrhea in the ED or outpatient clinic were retained for analysis.Results: Five articles reporting on two different tools were identified. Developed to assess the risk of hospitalization of children, the EsVida scale has not been externally validated. Developed originally to assess the level of dehydration in children, the Clinical Dehydration Scale (CDS) was evaluated as a risk stratification tool. For predicting intravenous rehydration, a CDS score ≥ 1 showed a sensitivity between 0.73 and 0.88 and specificity between 0.38 and 0.69, whereas a CDS score ≥ 5 showed a sensitivity between 0.06 and 0.32 and specificity between 0.94 and 0.99. For predicting hospitalization, a CDS score ≥ 1 showed a sensitivity between 0.74 and 1.00 and specificity between 0.34 and 0.38, whereas a CDS score ≥ 5 showed a sensitivity between 0.26 and 0.62 and specificity between 0.66 and 0.96. High heterogeneity among studies and unclear risk of bias precluded meta-analysis.Conclusion: As a risk-stratification tool, the CDS has been validated only for children. Further research is needed to develop and validate a tool suitable for adults in the ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]