Search

Women who received a diagnosis of breast cancer often report impairments in physical and psychological wellbeing, even some years after treatments. Individual awareness about physical changes, body image, and current sensations related to their body is important to maintain a psycho-emotional balance. Virtual reality, as an advanced human–computer interface, can be an effective tool to improve breast cancer survivors' abilities to know and manage their current sensations related to their bodies. The present study protocol proposes a virtual reality intervention aiming at promoting interoception and emotional wellbeing, fear of cancer recurrence, and body perception in breast cancer survivors, according to the three data collection times. Repeated-measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) with between–within interaction will be performed. Expected results include participants' awareness of their internal feelings, the reduction of negative emotions, and the management of symptoms related to the body, clarifying characteristics for the effective implementation of VR psychological intervention in the future.

Digital tools have been increasingly applied in the field of psychology and well-being, such as Virtual Reality (VR), that provides vivid and realistic illusions of environments and stimuli to users’ senses. Currently, one of the possible applications of VR in the field of psychology is the stimulation of creativity. Stimulating creativity might indeed enhance emotional regulation and promote positive feelings, which in turn might influence cognitive processes and past autobiographical memories. The present study aimed at evaluating the benefits and changes related to a creative VR experience on emotion regulation and the decision made during unpleasant past events. 25 healthy volunteers were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of two conditions: 1) painting VR, 2) neutral control condition. Before the experience, all participants were asked to think about an unpleasant past decision. Pre and post the exposure, participants evaluated the past decision and how much they felt the decision was based on System 1 or System 2. Results showed that participants in the creativity condition rated themselves as significantly more curious and felt that their creativity was stimulated compared to the control group. Furthermore, participants in the creative VR changed the perception of the how much they used System 1 in their choices, when controlling for emotional intelligence. Lastly, the creative experience led participants to feel less satisfied with their previous decision, possibly because it induced creative reasoning on possible alternatives. Results highlighted that VR for creativity can enhance creative feelings and shape emotions and individual relationship with decision-making.

Background: Advanced treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of both. Decisions surrounding NSCLC can be considered as preference-sensitive because multiple treatments exist that vary in terms of mode of administration, treatment schedules, and benefit–risk profiles. As part of the IMI PREFER project, we developed a protocol for an online preference survey for NSCLC patients exploring differences in preferences according to patient characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Moreover, this study will evaluate and compare the use of two different preference elicitation methods, the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the swing weighting (SW) task. Finally, the study explores how demographic (i.e., age, gender, and educational level) and clinical (i.e., cancer stage and line of treatment) information, health literacy, health locus of control, and quality of life may influence or explain patient preferences and the usefulness of a digital interactive tool in providing information on preference elicitation tasks according to patients. Methods: An online survey will be implemented with the aim to recruit 510 NSCLC patients in Belgium and Italy. Participants will be randomized 50:50 to first receive either the DCE or the SW. The survey will also collect information on participants' disease-related status, health locus of control, health literacy, quality of life, and perception of the educational tool. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps to quantitatively elicit and study patient preferences for NSCLC treatment alternatives. Results from this study will increase the understanding of which treatment aspects are most valued by NSCLC patients to inform decision-making in drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement. Methodologically, the comparison between the DCE and the SW task will be valuable to gain information on how these preference methods perform, IMI-PREFER

Background: The potential value of patient preference studies has been recognized in clinical individual treatment decision-making between clinicians and patients, as well as in upstream drug decision-making. Drug developers, regulators, reimbursement and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies are exploring how the use of patient preference studies could inform drug development, regulatory benefit risk-assessment and reimbursement decisions respectively. Understanding patient preferences may be especially valuable in decisions regarding Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) treatment options, where a variety of treatment options with different characteristics raise uncertainty about which features are most important to NSCLC patients. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, this qualitative study aimed to identify patient-relevant lung cancer treatment characteristics. Methods: This study consisted of a scoping literature review and four focus group discussions, 2 in Italy and 2 in Belgium, with a total of 24 NSCLC patients (Stages III-IV). The focus group discussions sought to identify which treatment characteristics patients find most relevant. The discussions were analyzed thematically using a thematic inductive analysis. Results: Patients highlighted themes reflecting: 1) positive effects or expected gains from treatment such as greater life expectancy and maintenance of daily functioning, 2) negative effects or adverse events related to therapy that negatively impact patients’ daily functioning such as fatigue and 3) uncertainty regarding the duration and type of treatment effects. These overarching themes were consistent among patients from Belgium and Italy, suggesting that treatment aspects related to efficacy and safety as well as the psychological impact of lung cancer treatment are common areas of concern for patients, regardless of cultural background or country. Discussion: Our findings illustrate the value of using qualitative me, IMI-PREFER

Introduction: Lung cancer is the deadliest and most prevalent cancer worldwide. Lung cancer treatments have different characteristics and are associated with a range of benefits and side effects for patients. Such differences may raise uncertainty among drug developers, regulators, payers, and clinicians regarding the value of these treatment effects to patients. The value of conducting patient preference studies (using qualitative and/or quantitative methods) for benefits and side effects of different treatment options has been recognized by healthcare stakeholders, such as drug developers, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and clinicians. However, evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct and use these studies in drug decision-making are lacking. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, we developed a protocol for a qualitative study that aims to understand which treatment characteristics are most important to lung cancer patients and to develop attributes and levels for inclusion in a subsequent quantitative preference survey. Methods: The study protocol specifies a four-phased approach: (i) a scoping literature review of published literature, (ii) four focus group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, (iii) two nominal group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, and (iv) multi-stakeholder discussions involving clinicians and preference experts. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps as to how qualitative research can be applied to identify and develop attributes and levels for inclusion in patient preference studies aiming to inform decisions across the drug life cycle. The results of this study are intended to inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding lung cancer treatment options. This protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing, IMI-PREFER

Therapeutic Assessment is a brief semistructured and collaborative psychological intervention developed by Stephen E. Finn (1996, 2007). In Therapeutic Assessment, the assessor and clients are collaboratively involved in all the phases of the process and psychological tests are used as “empathy magnifiers” in order to promote positive change throughout an assessment. Over the years, many authors have tested the efficacy of Therapeutic Assessment procedures in different contexts and have concluded that Therapeutic Assessment is well-suited for use with a broad array of clients. Despite some studies documenting the benefits of Therapeutic Assessment, results of individual studies have not been meta-analytically analyzed. Therefore, we performed a series of three-level meta-analyses to examine the efficacy of Therapeutic Assessment with adult clients. We included nine studies with 42 dependent variables, grouped into three types of outcomes: treatment process (6 studies, 18 nonindependent variables), clients’ symptoms (6 studies, 17 nonindependent variables), and clients’ self-enhancement (5 studies, 7 nonindependent variables). The results revealed statistically significant effects for each outcome, treatment process: g =.46, 95% CI [.33;.59]; p <.001; clients’ symptoms: g =.34, 95% CI [.06;.63]; p =.021; clients’ self-enhancement: g =.37, 95% CI [.05;.69]; p =.029. Moderator analyses also suggested that Therapeutic Assessment is resilient, since supervision, the inclusion of more Therapeutic Assessment elements, and additional hours of intervention do not impact substantially its outcomes. These results suggest that the most important aspect of Therapeutic Assessment may be its underlying philosophy and values, and not so much the exact way in which it is implemented.

Oral–Dependent Language (ODL) is currently included in the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) as an empirically supported variable that measures both implicit and explicit psychological processes related to dependence and oral motives. To date, almost all studies on ODL have been conducted in the U.S. so that little is known about how it works in other cultural contexts. Additionally, no study has investigated the Oral and Dependent subcomponents of this variable. This paper addresses ODL validity in Italy and its clinical utility by reporting on three studies, each addressing a specific research question. Study 1 examined the association of gender, age, and cultural background to ODL scores. Study 2 addressed predictive validity by examining the relationship of ODL and its subcomponents’ scores to dependent behaviors expressed by nonclinical participants in a laboratory task. Study 3 tested construct validity of ODL and its subcomponents scores via a clinical/nonclinical comparison paradigm. A total of 212 Italian participants (68 obese patients and nonobese volunteers) were enrolled in these studies. Data were analyzed through Bayesian and parametric techniques. Study 1 confirmed that Italian nonclinical individuals produced equivalent ODL scores to U.S. normative data; Study 2 found no association between ODL and occurrence of a dependency-related behavior in a laboratory setting; Study 3 showed that obese patients produced higher ODL scores than controls.

Background: Advanced treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of both. Decisions surrounding NSCLC can be considered as preference-sensitive because multiple treatments exist that vary in terms of mode of administration, treatment schedules, and benefit–risk profiles. As part of the IMI PREFER project, we developed a protocol for an online preference survey for NSCLC patients exploring differences in preferences according to patient characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Moreover, this study will evaluate and compare the use of two different preference elicitation methods, the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the swing weighting (SW) task. Finally, the study explores how demographic (i.e., age, gender, and educational level) and clinical (i.e., cancer stage and line of treatment) information, health literacy, health locus of control, and quality of life may influence or explain patient preferences and the usefulness of a digital interactive tool in providing information on preference elicitation tasks according to patients. Methods: An online survey will be implemented with the aim to recruit 510 NSCLC patients in Belgium and Italy. Participants will be randomized 50:50 to first receive either the DCE or the SW. The survey will also collect information on participants' disease-related status, health locus of control, health literacy, quality of life, and perception of the educational tool. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps to quantitatively elicit and study patient preferences for NSCLC treatment alternatives. Results from this study will increase the understanding of which treatment aspects are most valued by NSCLC patients to inform decision-making in drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement. Methodologically, the comparison between the DCE and the SW task will be valuable to gain information on how these preference methods perfo

Purpose: The literature provides few examples of family caregivers’ retrospective evaluation of nursing home services. This study aimed at analyzing narratives of Italian family caregivers of elders who experienced nursing home placement. Design and Methods: Data were gathered through in-depth interviews with family members after their relatives’ death. The interviews were based on the Critical Incident Technique, which allowed the categorization of the most memorable positive and negative events from the perspective of family members of elders deceased in nursing homes. Interviews were interpreted with a phenomenologically inspired thematic analysis approach. Participants were screened for complicated grief disorder as a confounding variable in relatives’ accounts of the treatment. Results: Results suggested that positive long-term recollection of the nursing home was associated with different themes emerging from the interviews: medical reliability and expertise, active demonstrations of care that extend beyond the contract with the facility, individualized attention, responsiveness, openness to dialog with family members about routines, management of the first impression, and family engagement. Lack of professionals’ expertise and medical failures, lack of care for patients’ personal goods, lack of family involvement, lack of individualized attention, lack of responsiveness, poor patient surveillance, and structural limits of the facilities were the themes that were more frequently negatively associated with the nursing home experience. Implications for Practice: Focusing on the key dimensions connected to the quality of the experience of family members can enrich the quality of existing nursing home services and allow healthcare policymakers and managers to design better facilities for the patients.