Search

This study compared public versus private affection-sharing experiences of individuals in mixed-sex ( N = 1018), same-sex ( N = 561), and gender-diverse ( N = 96) relationships. Private affection-sharing was similar across groups, except those in mixed-sex relationships reported somewhat less comfort doing so. Despite having a stronger desire to engage in public affection-sharing, those in same-sex and gender-diverse relationships shared public affection less frequently, were less comfortable doing so, refrained from doing so more often, and experienced much higher levels of vigilance related to public affection-sharing, compared to those in mixed-sex relationships. Heightened PDA-related vigilance may have health consequences, as higher levels were associated with worse psychological and physical well-being in all groups. However, individuals in same-sex relationships showed weaker associations between vigilance and well-being than those in mixed-sex relationships, suggesting possible resilience. Still, engaging in vigilance may take its toll, potentially serving as a mechanism through which minority stress works its effects. When we controlled for PDA-related vigilance, psychological and physical well-being levels in same-sex relationships increased relative to mixed-sex peers.

Background The demand for family caregiving in persons with chronic neurological conditions (CNCs) is increasing. Psychological resilience may empower and protect caregivers in their role. Thus, a synthesis of resilience evidence within this specific population is warranted. Aim In this systematic review we aimed to: (1) examine the origins and conceptualizations of resilience; (2) summarize current resilience measurement tools; and (3) synthesize correlates, predictors and outcomes of resilience in family caregivers of persons with CNCs. Design We sourced English articles published up to July 2020 across five databases using search terms involving CNCs, family caregivers and resilience. Results A total of 50 studies were retained. Nearly half (44%) of the studies used trait‐based resilience definitions, while about one third (36%) used process‐based definitions. Twelve different resilience scales were used, revealing mostly moderate to high‐resilience levels. Findings confirmed that resilience is related to multiple indicators of healthy functioning (e.g., quality of life, social support, positive coping), as it buffers against negative outcomes of burden and distress. Discordance relating to the interaction between resilience and demographic, sociocultural and environmental factors was apparent. Conclusions Incongruity remains with respect to how resilience is defined and assessed, despite consistent definitional concepts of healthy adaptation and equilibrium. The array of implications of resilience for well‐being confirms the potential for resilience to be leveraged within caregiver health promotion initiatives via policy and practice. Patient or Public Contribution The findings may inform future recommendations for researchers and practitioners to develop high‐quality resilience‐building interventions and programmes to better mobilize and support this vulnerable group.

BACKGROUND People with moderate to severe multiple sclerosis (MS) and their family care partners do not engage in sufficient physical activity (PA) for health benefits. Dyadic PA interventions need to be developed to benefit each individual and the dyad. The objective of this study was to engage expert stakeholders in prioritizing and refining key intervention content, delivery methods, and the practical/logistical aspects of a dyadic PA intervention for persons with MS and their care partners. METHODS Thirty-two stakeholders (14 clinicians, 11 people with MS, 5 MS care partners, and 2 representatives of organizations that provide support services for people with MS and/or MS care partners) completed 2 rounds of a modified e-Delphi survey. In round 1, participants rated items across 3 domains: key intervention content (n = 8), delivery methods (n = 9), and practical/logistical aspects (n = 4). Participants contributed additional ideas about these domains, which were incorporated into round 2. Items that did not reach consensus in round 1 were forwarded to round 2 for rerating. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis. RESULTS A 24-item list of recommendations was generated, including ensuring that presentation of the intervention content encouraged lifestyle activities in addition to exercise, using videoconferencing rather than teleconferencing as a delivery platform, and stressing the importance of flexibility during the support calls. CONCLUSIONS Feedback will be used to improve the quality of the intervention. The next step in this line of research involves evaluating the refined intervention in a pilot feasibility trial.

Background Psychological resilience may play an important role in protecting multiple sclerosis care-partners from the negative effects of their support role. However, predictors of resilience in this population have yet to be identified. Objectives To identify characteristics predictive of psychological resilience in multiple sclerosis care-partners as informed by the Ecological Model of Resilience. Methods Informal multiple sclerosis care-partners ( n = 540) completed an online survey. Psychological resilience was measured using the 25-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale. Sociodemographic and care-context predictors of resilience were analyzed using hierarchical regression. Results The mean resilience score was 59.0 ( SD = 7.6) out of a possible 100. Sociodemographic variables accounted for 31% of the variance in resilience scores in multiple sclerosis care-partners. When care-context variables were incorporated into the model, 55% of variance was explained ( F[7,320] = 26.824, p Conclusions Multiple sclerosis care-partners differ strikingly from other caregiving populations. Both sociodemographic and care-context variables were found to promote or hinder resilience in multiple sclerosis care-partners. Social support, in particular, may be an important target for promoting resilience in multiple sclerosis care-partners and could be leveraged in future initiatives.

Background Physical activity (PA) is beneficial for all people; however, people affected by multiple sclerosis (MS) find regular PA challenging. These people may include individuals with advanced disabilities and their care partners. Objective The objective of this study is to determine the feasibility of a dyadic PA intervention for people with advanced MS and their care partners. Methods This study is a randomized controlled feasibility trial of a 12-week intervention, with 1:1 allocation into an immediate intervention condition or delayed control condition. A target of 20 people with MS–care partner dyads will be included. The outcomes will be indicators of process, resources, management, and scientific feasibility. Participant satisfaction with the intervention components will be evaluated using a satisfaction survey. The subjective experience of participation in the study will be explored using semistructured interviews. Results The project is funded by the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers. This protocol was approved by the Ottawa Hospital Research Ethics Board (20190329-01H) and the University of Ottawa Research Ethics Board (H-09-19-4886). The study protocol was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov in February 2020. The findings of this feasibility trial will be disseminated through presentations at community events to engage the MS population in the interpretation of our results and in the next steps. The results will also be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented to the scientific community at national and international MS conferences. Conclusions The data collected from this feasibility trial will be used to refine the intervention and materials in preparation for a pilot randomized controlled trial. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04267185; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04267185. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/18410