Search

Sara Pettersson,1 Leonie Klompstra,1 Maria Jirwe,2 Tiny Jaarsma1 1Linkoping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linkoping, Sweden; 2Red Cross University College, Department of Health Sciences, Huddinge, SwedenCorrespondence: Sara Pettersson, Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, SE 601 74, Norrköping, Sweden, Tel +4611363635, Fax +4611125448, Email sara.pettersson@liu.seIntroduction: Migrants, especially from the Middle East, experience poorer health outcomes and face greater difficulties in accessing healthcare compared to native populations and there is a need for culturally appropriate education for this vulnerable group. The purpose of this study is to describe the process of developing a culturally appropriate tool to support self-care in migrants with type 2 diabetes.Methods: In this Co-design study, a tool for supporting self-care in migrants with type 2 diabetes was developed. Migrant patients with type 2 diabetes, healthcare providers and researchers participated in the process, which was based on six elements; engage, plan, explore, develop, decide and change. From February 2021 to December 2022, idea groups were conducted, and a tool was developed through brainstorming, prioritizing and prototyping.Results: In total, 14 migrant patients, ten health care providers and four researchers participated in the Co-design process. The patients wished to receive information about type 2 diabetes self-care behaviour in their own languages. The healthcare providers asked for clear instructions on where to guide their patients regarding reliable information about diabetes in the patient’s own language. All participants agreed that information can be presented in different formats, either: text (paper or online), audio-visual via recorded videos and/or lectures and pictures.Discussion: The Co-design process led to several important insights and experiences related to the importance of diverse cultural backgrounds. When conducting a Co-design study with end-users as stakeholders, it is significant that the stakeholders have a diverse background in experiences, both as patients as well as those who deliver or implement the health service. In this study it was of great importance to include patients with diverse backgrounds regarding; gender, age, health literacy, occupation, years living in Sweden and duration of diabetes.Keywords: type 2 diabetes, self-care, culture, patient education, primary healthcare

The aim of this study was to evaluate an individually tailored smoking-cessation intervention delivered in rheumatology care and compare the characteristics of patients who quit smoking with those who did not. This was an open single-group prospective intervention study over 24 months, with assessments at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Current smokers with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were invited to a smoking-cessation programme including behavioural change support, with or without pharmacotherapy. Data on disease activity, medical treatment, and patient-reported outcomes were retrieved from the Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients at month 24 who reported having quit smoking with self-reported 7 day smoking abstinence. In total, 99 patients participated in the study. Median age was 58 years (interquartile range 50–64); 69% were female and 88% rheumatoid factor and/or anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide positive. At 24 months, 21% of the patients had quit smoking. At 6, 12, and 18 months, 12%, 12%, and 14% of patients, respectively, had quit smoking. For patients still smoking at 24 months, the median number of cigarettes per day was significantly reduced from 12 to 6 (p ≤ 0.001). Among patients who had quit smoking at 24 months, a smaller proportion reported anxiety at baseline compared to those still smoking (28% vs 58%, p = 0.02). A smoking-cessation intervention including behavioural change support with or without pharmacotherapy can be helpful for a substantial number of RA patients. Anxiety is associated with lower smoking-cessation success rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We compared patients’ assessments of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) disease activity by a Swedish version of the Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire (SLAQ) with physicians’ assessments by the Systemic Lupus Activity Measure (SLAM) and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K). We also explored the performance of the SLAQ in patients with short (< 1 year) versus long (≥ 1 year) disease duration. Method: Patients filled out the SLAQ before physicians’ assessments. Correlations between SLAQ total, subscales (Symptom score, Flares, Patients global) and SLAM and SLEDAI-2K, as well as between the corresponding items in SLAQ and SLAM, were evaluated using Spearman’s ρ. Comparisons between patients with different disease durations were performed with Mann–Whitney U or chi-squared tests. Results: We included 203 patients (79% women), with a median age of 45 years [interquartile range (IQR) 33–57 years] and disease duration of 5 years (IQR 0–14 years). Correlations between physicians‘ SLAM without laboratory items (SLAM-nolab) and patients’ assessments were: SLAQ total, ρ = 0.685, Symptom score, ρ = 0.651, Flares, ρ = 0.547, and Patients global, ρ = 0.600. Of the symptom items, fatigue (ρ = 0.640), seizures (ρ = 0.635), and headache (ρ = 0.604) correlated most closely. Neurology/stroke syndrome, skin, and lymphadenopathy correlated less well (ρ < 0.24). Patients’ and physicians’ assessments were notably more discordant for patients with short disease durations. Conclusion: We confirm that the SLAQ can be used to monitor disease activity. However, the discrepancy between patients’ and physicians’ assessments was greater for patients with short versus long disease duration. We encourage further use of the SLAQ, but would like to develop a shorter version which would be valuable in modern, partly web-based, clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Behavioral medicine (BM) treatment is recommended to be implemented for pain management in physical therapy. Its implementation requires physical therapists (PTs), who are skilled at performing functional behavioral analyses based on physical, psychological and behavioral assessments. The purpose of the current study was to explore and describe PTs' assessments, analyses and their use of behavioral change techniques (BCTs) in initial consultations with patients who seek primary health care due to musculoskeletal pain.Methods: A descriptive and explorative research design was applied, using data from video recordings of 12 primary health care PTs. A deductive analysis was performed, based on a specific protocol with definitions of PTs' assessment of physical and psychological prognostic factors (red and yellow flags, respectively), analysis of the clinical problem, and use of BCTs. An additional inductive analysis was performed to identify and describe the variation in the PTs' clinical practice.Results: Red and yellow flags were assessed in a majority of the cases. Analyses were mainly based on biomedical assessments and none of the PTs performed functional behavioral analyses. All of the PTs used BCTs, mainly instruction and information, to facilitate physical activity and improved posture. The four most clinically relevant cases were selected to illustrate the variation in the PTs' clinical practice. The results are based on 12 experienced primary health care PTs in Sweden, limiting the generalizability to similar populations and settings.Conclusion: Red and yellow flags were assessed by PTs in the current study, but their interpretation and integration of the findings in analyses and treatment were incomplete, indicating a need of further strategies to implement behavioral medicine in Swedish primary health care physical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The objective of this paper is to identify clusters of fatigue in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and matched controls, and to analyze these clusters with respect to lifestyle habits, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety and depression. Methods Patients with SLE (n = 305) and age- and gender-matched population controls (n = 311) were included. Three measurements of fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Vitality (VT, from SF-36) and Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue scale (MAF) and hierarchic cluster analysis were used to define clusters with different degrees of fatigue. Lifestyle habits were investigated through questionnaires. HRQoL was assessed with the SF-36 and anxiety/depression with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Results Three clusters, denominated “High,” “Intermediate” and “Low” fatigue clusters, were identified. The “High” contained 80% patients, and 20% controls (median; VT 25, FSS 5.8, MAF 37.4). These had the most symptoms of depression (51%) and anxiety (34%), lowest HRQoL (p < 0.001) and they exercised least frequently. The “Intermediate” (48% patients and 52% controls) (median; VT 55, FSS 4.1, MAF 23.5) had similarities with the “Low” regarding sleep/rest whereas social status and smoking were closer to the “High.” The“Low” contained 22% patients and 78% controls (median; VT 80, FSS 2.3, MAF 10.9). They had the highest perceived HRQoL (p < 0.001), least symptoms of anxiety (10%), no depression, smoked least (13%) and reported the highest percentage (24%) of exercising ≥3 times/week. Conclusion Fatigue is common, but not a general feature of SLE. It is associated with depression, anxiety, low HRQoL and less physical exercise. Patients with SLE and population controls with a healthy lifestyle reported lower levels of fatigue. Whether lifestyle changes can reduce fatigue, which is a major problem for a majority of SLE patients, needs to be further explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To estimate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in seven self-administered measures assessing fatigue in Swedish patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Method: The participants (n = 51, women 98%, age 52.8 ± 12.1 years, disease duration 18.7 ± 13.6 years) met in groups of six to nine persons. After completing seven fatigue questionnaires [the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS); the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) scale; the 20-item Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI); the Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS); the Short Form-36 Vitality subscale (VT); the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy – Fatigue (FACIT-F) scale; and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)], each respondent had a minimum of five face-to-face discussions, followed by an individual comparative assessment of their own level of fatigue (seven-grade scale). This method resulted in 260 contrasting assessments; MCIDs were first calculated using the paired differences and then established by a regression approach. Patients were asked to comment on their experience with the questionnaires and whether they captured their fatigue adequately. Results: The paired approach (using ‘little more fatigue’ as an anchor for MCID during the face-to-face comparative assessments) provided estimates of 4.6–17.0; the regression approach provided estimates of 4.3–10.8. Estimates using the regression approach were consistently lower than those using the paired model. The MCID estimates were least favourable and fewer respondents supported the use of the NRS compared to the other self-reported questionnaires. Conclusions: All seven instruments detect MCIDs for fatigue in Swedish patients with SLE. However, the single-question measure was not supported by the MCID estimates or by comments from the respondents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]