Search

Aim: Describe and compare generic and disease-specific caregiver contribution (CC) to self-care behaviours in the dimensions of self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring and self-care management in multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). Design: Multicentre cross-sectional study. Methods: We enrolled caregivers of patients with MCC, from April 2017 to November 2022, if they were (a) 18 years of age or older and (b) identified by the patient as the principal unpaid informal caregiver. The Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory, Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Heart Failure Index, Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of COPD Inventory and Caregiver Contribution to Self-care of Diabetes Inventory were used to measure generic and disease-specific contribution to patient self-care. Descriptive statistics, Student's t-tests and Pearson's correlation coefficients were used. Results: We found adequate generic CC for self-care monitoring but inadequate CC in self-care maintenance and management. All CC to disease-specific self-care maintenance, monitoring and management scales' scores were inadequate, except for caregivers of diabetic patients in which we observed an adequate score in the CC to self-care maintenance and self-care management scales in those practice insulin therapy. Conclusion: Caregivers experience difficulties in performing behaviours of contribution to their patients affected by chronic conditions. Caregivers of patients with MCCs contribute more to self-care in aspects related to provider prescriptions and less to lifestyle changes. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Healthcare professionals have to know in which behaviours caregivers show gaps and reflect on the reasons for poor CC to self-care to develop interventions to enhance these behaviours. Impact: This study underlines the importance of choosing the most appropriate instrument for measuring CC to self-care, considering the caregiver's characteristic

AimPatients with heart failure experience multiple co-occurring symptoms that lower their quality of life and increase hospitalization and mortality rates. So far, no heart failure symptom cluster study recruited patients from community settings or focused on symptoms predicting most clinical outcomes. Considering physical and psychological symptoms together allows understanding how they burden patients in different combinations. Moreover, studies predicting symptom cluster membership using variables other than symptoms are lacking. We aimed to (a) cluster heart failure patients based on physical and psychological symptoms and (b) predict symptom cluster membership using sociodemographic/clinical variables.DesignSecondary analysis of MOTIVATE-HF trial, which recruited 510 heart failure patients from a hospital, an outpatient and a community setting in Italy.MethodsCluster analysis was performed based on the two scores of the Hospital Anxiety-Depression scale and two scores of the Heart-Failure Somatic Perception Scale predicting most clinical outcomes. ANOVA and chi-square test were used to compare patients' characteristics among clusters. For the predictive analysis, we split the data into a training set and a test set and trained three classification models on the former to predict patients' symptom cluster membership based on 11 clinical/sociodemographic variables. Permutation analysis investigated which variables best predicted cluster membership.ResultsFour clusters were identified based on the intensity and combination of psychological and physical symptoms: mixed distress (high psychological, low physical symptoms), high distress, low distress and moderate distress. Clinical and sociodemographic differences were found among clusters. NYHA-class (New York Heart Association) and sleep quality were the most important variables in predicting symptom cluster membership.ConclusionsThese results can support the development of tailored symptom management intervention

BackgroundMutuality, defined as "the positive quality of the relationship between a caregiver and a care receiver", was found to be associated with self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care in heart failure (HF). However, no studies were conducted to evaluate whether motivational interviewing (MI) can improve mutuality in patients with HF and caregivers.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of MI on mutuality in HF patient-caregiver dyads.MethodsThis is a secondary outcome analysis of the MOTIVATE-HF randomized controlled trial, the primary aim of which was to evaluate the effect of MI on improving self-care in patients with HF. Participants were randomized into 3 arms: (1) MI for patients only, (2) MI for both patients and caregivers, and (3) standard care. To assess the HF patients' and caregivers' mutuality, the Mutuality Scale was used in its patient and caregiver versions.ResultsPatients with HF had a median age of 74 years, and there were more men (58%). Most patients were retired (76.2%). Caregivers had a median age of 55 years and were mostly women (75.5%). Most patients were in New York Heart Association class II (61.9%) and had an ischemic HF etiology (33.6%). The motivational interviews did not show any impact on changes in the patient and caregiver mutuality during the follow-up time (3, 6, 9, and 12 months from baseline). The condition of living together between the patient and the caregiver was significantly associated with better mutuality between the patient and the caregiver.ConclusionsMotivational interviewing performed by nurses was not effective in improving mutuality in patients with HF and caregivers, but the target variable of the intervention was patient self-care. Stronger effects of MI on mutuality were observed in patients with HF and caregivers who live together. Future studies should target mutuality to see whether MI is really effective.

Background Better caregiver contribution to self-care in heart failure is associated with better patient outcomes. However, caregiver contribution to self-care is also associated with high anxiety and depression, poor quality of life, and poor sleep in caregivers. It is still unclear whether interventions that encourage caregivers to contribute more to patient self-care might increase caregivers' anxiety and depression and decrease their quality of life and sleep. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a motivational interview intervention aimed at improving caregiver contribution to self-care in heart failure on caregivers' anxiety, depression, quality of life, and sleep. Methods This is a secondary outcome analysis of the MOTIVATE-HF trial. Patients with heart failure and their caregivers were randomized into arm 1 (motivational interview to patients), arm 2 (motivational interview to patients and caregivers), and arm 3 (standard care). Data were collected between June 2014 and October 2018. The article has been prepared following the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials checklist. Results A sample of 510 patient-caregiver dyads was enrolled. Over the year of the study, the levels of anxiety, depression, quality of life, and sleep in caregivers did not significantly change among the 3 arms. Conclusions Motivational interview aimed at improving caregiver contribution to self-care does not seem to increase caregiver anxiety and depression, nor decrease their quality of life and sleep. Thus, such an intervention might be safely delivered to caregivers of patients with heart failure, although further studies are needed to confirm our findings.

In patients with heart failure (HF), self-care, and caregiver contribution to self-care (i.e., the daily management of the disease by patients and caregivers) are essential for improving patient outcomes. However, patients and caregivers are often inadequate in their self-care and contribution to self-care, respectively, and struggle to perform related tasks. Face-to-face motivational interviewing (MI) effectively improves self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care, but the evidence on remote MI is scarce and inconclusive. The aims of this randomized controlled trial will be to evaluate whether remote MI performed via video call in patients with HF: (1) is effective at improving self-care maintenance in patients (primary outcome); (2) is effective for the following secondary outcomes: (a) for patients: self-care management, self-care monitoring, and self-efficacy; HF symptoms; generic and disease-specific quality of life; anxiety and depression; use of healthcare services; and mortality; and (b) for caregivers: contribution to self-care, self-efficacy, and preparedness. We will conduct a two-arm randomized controlled trial. We will enroll and randomize 432 dyads (patients and their informal caregivers) in Arm 1, in which patients and caregivers will receive MI or, in Arm 2, standard care. MI will be delivered seven times over 12 months. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline and 3 (primary outcome), 6, 9, and 12 months from enrollment. This trial will demonstrate whether an inexpensive and easily deliverable intervention can improve important HF outcomes. With the restrictions on in-person healthcare professional interventions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to evaluate whether MI is also effective remotely.

Objectives: Family is a major source of support for older chronically-ill patients and known to be associated with better self-care. Depression and self-care self-efficacy are associated with healthy behaviors and thus may serve as mechanisms by which family support influences self-care. We explored depression and self-care self-efficacy as mediators of the relationship between perceived family support and self-care. Methods: Five hundred forty-one older adults with multiple chronic illnesses were recruited from outpatients and community settings. Three structural equation models (SEM) were fit on cross-sectional data. We measured perceived family support (subscale of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, scores range 1-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, scores range 0-27), selfcare self-efficacy (Self-Care Self Efficacy Scale, standardized scores range 0-100), and self-care maintenance, monitoring, and management (Self-care of Chronic Illness Inventory, standardized scores range 0-100). Results: Participants (mean age = 76.6±7.3 yrs) were predominantly females (55.6%). In the full sample, depression and self-care self-efficacy mediated the relationship between perceived family support and self-care; in the gender-stratified SEM, men’s depression was no longer a significant mediator. Depression and self-care self-efficacy were significant mediators of the relation between perceived family support and self-care. Conclusion: In older chronically-ill patients, interventions addressing perceived family support may facilitate a rapid improvement in self-care self-efficacy and a decrease in depressive symptoms, particularly among women.

The study tested the construct validity and reliability of the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Inventory and the Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Contributing to Self-Care of COPD Scale. The two instruments were developed by modifying the Self-Care of COPD Inventory and Self-Care Self-Efficacy Scale in COPD into caregiver versions. The psychometric properties were tested in a convenience sample of 261 informal caregivers of COPD patients recruited in Italy in two cross-sectional studies. Structural validity was tested by confirmatory factor analysis, construct validity by posing several hypotheses, and internal consistency through factor score determinacy and global reliability index for multidimensional scales. In confirmatory factor analysis, the caregiver contribution to self-care maintenance, monitoring and management scales, composing the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of COPD Inventory, presented good fit indices. Global reliability indices ranged 0.75–0.88. The caregiver self-efficacy scale presented a comparative fit index of 0.96 and a global reliability index of 0.82. The caregiver contribution to self-care and the caregiver self-efficacy scales correlated moderately among themselves and with the patient versions of the scales, and scores were higher with caregiver-oriented dyadic care types and female caregivers. Our study provides evidence of the two instruments’ construct validity and internal consistency.

Background: During the COVID-19 outbreak, patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) faced several changes in their daily life. However, the effects of these changes on the patients' lived experiences are not still investigated. Aims: The current study explored the lived experience of people with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the COVID-19 outbreak, people with LVADs faced several changes in their daily life. However, the effects of these changes on the patients' lived experiences are not still investigated. Methods and results: Qualitative data analysis was conducted employing the interpretative phenomenological analysis approach. We followed the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines. Eight male participants with LVAD aged from 65 to 82 were interviewed. Overall, two main themes ('Worsening of psychological distress' and 'Moving forward') and eight sub-Themes emerged from the qualitative analysis. Conclusions: People with LVADs experienced feelings of worry and solitude related to the risk of being infected or not receiving adequate treatment due to changes in the healthcare system during the pandemic; however, they managed to move forward with their lives using different strategies for dealing with the difficult situation.

Objectives: Self-care of chronic conditions involves both patients and their informal caregivers and therefore might be considered as a dyadic phenomenon. Nevertheless, empirical evidence supporting a dyadic construct is unavailable. This study aimed to explore the existence of a dyadic construct in self-care maintenance, monitoring, and management in patients affected by chronic conditions and their informal caregivers. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional design. We used the Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory and the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory, which measure patient self-care and informal caregivers’ contribution to self-care maintenance, monitoring and management. Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling was performed to verify the existence of dyadic latent constructs in each scale in patients and informal caregivers. Results: A convenience sample of 493 patients and informal caregivers, with a mean age of 76.47 and 52.76 years, respectively, was studied. In the self-care maintenance scales, 2 correlated factors (r = 0.34, P < .001) were identified, indicating the presence of a dyadic second-order construct. In addition, 2 factors that were not correlated (r = 0.11, P = .064) were identified in the self-care monitoring scales, indicating the absence of a dyadic construct. Finally, we found a 3-factor model in the self-care management scales composed of both patient and caregiver items, indicating a dyadic first-order construct. Conclusions: Knowing which care behaviors are dyadic in chronic conditions is important for tailoring interventions to improve self-care. Self-care maintenance and management would benefit from dyadic interventions, while self-care monitoring would not. The results of this study may illuminate future theoretical and scientific developments in dyadic care of chronic illness.

Aims: Explore the self-care experiences of patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) and caregivers' contributions to patient self-care during COVID-19 pandemic. Design: A descriptive qualitative design was used. The COREQ checklist was used for study reporting. Methods: Individual semi-structured interviews were used to collect data from patients with MCCs and caregivers selected from the dataset of an ongoing longitudinal study. Data analysis was performed through deductive thematic analysis. The middle-range theory of self-care of chronic illness, which entails the three dimensions of self-care maintenance, monitoring and management, was used as a theoretical framework to guide data collection and analysis. Results: A total of 16 patients and 25 caregivers were interviewed from May to June 2020. The participants were mainly women, with a mean age for patients of 76.25 years and caregivers of 45.76 years; the caregivers were mainly the patients' children (72%). During the pandemic, some patients reported remaining unchanged in their self-care maintenance, monitoring and management behaviours, others intensified their behaviours, and others decreased them. Caregivers played an important role in protecting patients from the risk of contagion COVID-19 and in ensuring patients' self-care of chronic diseases through direct and indirect interventions. Conclusions: Critical events can modify the self-care experiences of chronically ill patients and caregivers' contributions, leading to maintenance, increase or decrease of self-care and contributions to self-care behaviours. Impact: Patients with MCCs and their caregivers can react in different ways in their performances of self-care and contribution to patients' self-care behaviours when ordinary daily life is disrupted; therefore, nurses should assess such performances during critical events to identify the individuals at risk of reduced self-care and promote the most suitable healthcare services (e.g.

Introduction: We know that patient and caregiver sex influence patient self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care in multiple chronic conditions. However, the role of dyad sex combination (e.g., male patient and female caregiver, female patient and male caregiver, male patient and caregiver, and female patient and caregiver) in influencing patient self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care remains unexplored. Our aim was to investigate the relationship between patient and caregiver sex combination and patient self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care in multiple chronic conditions.Design: Multicentre cross-sectional study.Methods: We enrolled patients with multiple chronic conditions and caregiver dyads in outpatient and community settings from April 2017 to December 2019. We used the Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory and the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory that measure, from the patient and caregiver perspective, self-care maintenance (i.e., behaviors to maintain illness stability), self-care monitoring (i.e., monitoring of illness signs and symptoms), and self-care management (i.e., behaviors to manage signs and symptoms). We used multivariate analysis of covariance to evaluate the association between sex and self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care.Results: We recruited 540 patient-caregiver dyads. Male patients cared by female caregivers performed higher self-care maintenance compared to female patients cared by female caregivers. Female caregivers caring for female patients performed higher caregiver contribution to self-care monitoring compared to male caregivers caring for female or male patients.Conclusions: Clinicians should consider the influence of patient and caregiver sex combination on self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care in multiple chronic conditions to provide tailored interventions.Clinical Relevance: Healthcare professionals should consider the patient and caregiver

Background: Interoception, the ability of the organism to sense, interpret, and regulate signals originating from within the body, plays an important role in how individuals perceive and respond to symptoms. However, there is scarce evidence on the role of interoception in the symptom experience of people with chronic conditions. Aim: To synthesize the role of interoception in the symptom experience of adults with a chronic condition. Methods: Systematic review. We searched PubMed, Psychinfo, Embase, CINAHL, and Science Citation Index-Expanded. We included primary research (all study designs) addressing our study aim, published between 2013 and 2021, and measuring at least one dimension of interoception. Any chronic condition and any symptom were included. No language limits were applied. Only the adult population was included. Results: We included 18 quantitative studies investigating the relationship between three interoceptive dimensions (i.e., accuracy, sensibility, awareness) and condition-specific symptoms in 8 chronic conditions. People with chronic conditions had lower interoceptive accuracy than healthy controls. Higher interoceptive sensibility was associated with lower symptom severity/frequency. Higher interoceptive accuracy was associated with lower symptom severity/frequency in half of the studies, while the other half reported the opposite. Only one study explored interoceptive awareness. Conclusion: Interoceptive accuracy is lower in patients with chronic conditions. Higher interoceptive sensibility is associated with lower symptom severity/frequency, but this relationship is unclear when it comes to interoceptive accuracy and awareness.

Self-care of multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) and caregiver contribution to self-care have been theorized as dyadic. However, the different dyadic archetypes are still unknown. This cross-sectional study aimed to identify dyadic archetypes related to how in patient–caregiver dyads manage the patient’s MCCs and to describe other ways in which the dyadic archetypes differ. A sample of 340 MCCs patient–caregiver dyads was enrolled in outpatient and community settings. Patients had a mean age of 76.7 (±7.3) years and were mostly female (54.5%). Caregivers had a mean age of 54.6 (±15.1) years and were mostly female (71.5%). Four dyadic archetypes were observed: “autonomous,” “compensatory,” “balanced,” and “complementary” care. Clinical programs should consider the different characteristics of dyads to support self-care.

Background Sleep disturbance is one of the most common symptoms among patients with heart failure (HF), and it may affect the ability of patients to perform self-care. There is a lack of evidence on the association between sleep quality and its components and self-care in adults with HF. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between sleep quality and its components and self-care in adults with HF. Methods This study is a secondary analysis of baseline data from the MOTIVATE-HF study, a randomized controlled trial on patients with HF and their caregivers. Only patients' data were analyzed in this study (n = 498). Sleep quality and self-care were evaluated with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and the Self-Care of Heart Failure Index v6.2, respectively. Results A habitual sleep efficiency of 75% to 84% was associated with lower self-care maintenance compared with a habitual sleep efficiency of 85% or greater (P =.031), as was taking sleep medications once or twice a week compared with less than once a week (P =.001). A frequency of daytime dysfunction less than once a week was associated with lower self-care management compared with a frequency of daytime dysfunction of 3 or more times a week (P =.025). Taking sleep medications less than once a week was associated with lower self-care confidence compared with taking sleep medications 3 or more times a week (P =.018). Conclusion Poor sleep quality is frequently reported by patients with HF. Sleep efficiency, sleep medications, and daytime dysfunction may influence self-care more than the other sleep quality components.

Aims: To examine the distribution of dyadic care types in multiple chronic conditions, compare self-care and caregiver contributions to patients' self-care in each care type and identify the patient and caregiver characteristics associated with each care type. Design: Secondary analysis of a multicentre, cross-sectional study. Methods: Patient-caregiver dyads were enrolled from outpatient clinics and community settings. The Dyadic Symptom Management Type Scale was used to categorize dyads by type. Self-care, self-efficacy, comorbidities and cognitive impairment were measured in patients, whereas caregiver contributions to patient self-care, self-efficacy, caregiver burden and hours of caregiving were measured in caregivers. Sociodemographic characteristics perceived social support and mutuality were measured in both patients and caregivers. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: A sample of 541 patient-caregiver dyads was examined. The most frequent dyadic care type was the collaborative-oriented (63%). In the patient-oriented type, patients scored higher on self-care compared with caregivers; in the caregiver-oriented and collaborative types, caregivers scored higher than patients supporting the typology. The patient-oriented type was associated with younger, healthier male patients with better cognitive status, who scored higher for mutuality and whose caregivers scored lower for burden. The caregiver-oriented type was associated with older, less educated patients, with caregivers experiencing higher burden and unemployment. The collaborative type was associated with sicker patients, with the caregiver more probably to be female and employed, with higher perceived social support, mutuality and burden. The incongruent dyadic care type was associated with lower caregiver mutuality. Impact: In the context of multiple chronic conditions, clinicians should consider targeting any educational interventions aimed at improving patient self-care and c

Objectives: Caregiver self-efficacy—a caregiver's belief in his/her ability to contribute to patient self-care—is associated with better patient and caregiver outcomes in single chronic conditions. It is, however, unknown if caregiver self-efficacy improves patient and caregiver outcomes in multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) because there is no instrument to measure this variable. We developed the 10-item Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Contributing to patient Self-Care (CSE-CSC) scale for that purpose, and we tested its psychometric characteristics in caregivers of patients with MCCs. Methods: In this cross-sectional multisite study, we tested the structural validity of the CSE-CSC scale with exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and we tested construct validity by correlating CSE-CSC scores with those of the Caregiver Contributions to Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory. We also tested reliability, and precision of the CSE-CSC scale. Results: The 358 enrolled caregivers (mean age 54.6 years; 71.5% female) cared for patients with an average of 3.2 chronic conditions. Structural validity was good, and it showed 2 factors within the scale. Construct validity showed significant correlations between scores of the CSE-CSC scale and the Caregiver Contributions to Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory. Reliability coefficients were between 0.90 and 0.97. Measurement error yielded satisfactory results. Conclusions: The CSE-CSC scale is valid, reliable, and precise in measuring caregiver self-efficacy in contributing to patient self-care in MCCs. Because caregiver self-efficacy is a modifiable variable, the CSE-CSC scale can be used in clinical practice and research to improve patient and caregiver outcomes.

Aims Intense health-care service use and high mortality are common in heart failure (HF) patients. This secondary analysis of the MOTIVATE-HF trial investigates the effectiveness of motivational interviewing (MI) in reducing health-care service use (e.g. emergency service use and hospitalizations) and all-cause mortality.Methods and results This study used a randomized controlled trial. Patients and caregivers were randomized to Arm 1 (MI for patients), Arm 2 (MI for patients and caregivers), or Arm 3 (control group). Data were collected at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Face-to-face MI plus three telephone calls were performed in Arms 1 and 2. The sample consisted of 510 patient (median age 74 years, 58% male patients) and caregiver dyads (median age 55 years, 75% female patients). At 12 months, 16.1%, 17%, and 11.2% of patients used health-care services at least once in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively, without significant difference. At 3 months, 1.9%, 0.6%, and 5.1% of patients died in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Mortality was lower in Arm 2 vs. Arm 3 at 3 months [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.112, 95% CI: 0.014-0.882, P = 0.04]; no difference was found at subsequent follow-ups. Mortality was lower in Arm 1 vs. Arm 3 at 3 months but did not reach statistical significance (HR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.104-1.414, P = 0.15).Conclusion This study suggests that MI reduces mortality in patients with HF if caregivers are included in the intervention. Further studies with a stronger intervention and longer follow-up are needed to clarify the benefits of MI on health-care service use and mortality.

This study aimed to explore lived experience of patients with heart failure (HF) during the COVID-19 pandemic. A qualitative study was conducted using an interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). Data collection performed in March-May 2020, using in-depth, semi-structured interviews on a purposive sample. Data were analyzed according to the IPA methodology, and triangulation, bracketing, journaling, and member checking were used to assure rigor. 14 patients with HF were enrolled, and three main themes described their lived experience during the COVID-19 pandemic: Vulnerability, Hanging in the balance, and Coping strategies. These people felt particularly vulnerable to the novel virus and experienced uncertainty due to hospital organization changes. Because of this, they felt like they were hanging in the balance, experiencing various negative feelings. Nevertheless, they managed to deal with this challenging situation by implementing some peculiar coping strategies. The COVID-19 represents a significant challenge for patients with HF, impacting significantly on their lives.

Purpose: Anxiety, depression, poor sleep quality and lower quality of life (QOL) are associated with worse outcomes in heart failure (HF) patients. Motivational interview (MI) has been effective in different patient populations to promote self-care. However, its effect on anxiety, depression, sleep quality and QOL in HF patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of MI on anxiety, depression, sleep quality and QOL over 12 months from the intervention. Methods: This was a planned, secondary outcome analysis of the MOTIVATE-HF study, a three-arm randomized controlled trial (1:1:1) evaluating the effect of MI in improving self-care in HF patients. In Arm 1, the patient received MI, while in Arm 2, the patient and the caregiver received MI. Arm 3, the control group, received standard treatment. Endpoints were evaluated with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) and the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) every three months for one year. Results: We enrolled and randomized 510 HF patient and caregiver dyads (155 dyads in Arm 1, 177 dyads in Arm 2, and 178 dyads in Arm 3). A total of 238 HF patients and 235 caregivers completed the 12-month trial. No significant changes were seen in anxiety, depression and sleep quality over time among the three study arms, but disease-specific QOL improved in the intervention groups, especially in Arm 2. Conclusion: Clinicians may want to include both patients and caregivers when providing MI interventions. Further research is needed to investigate the required intensity of MI to be effective on sleep quality, anxiety and depression (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02894502).

Background: Multiple chronic conditions (MCC) are highly prevalent worldwide, especially among older populations. Patient self-care and care partner (or caregiver) contributions to self-care are recommended to reduce the impact of MCC and improve patients’ outcomes. Objectives: To describe patient self-care and care partner contributions to self-care and to identify determinants of patient self-care and care partner contributions to self-care at the patient and care partner level. Design: Multicentre cross-sectional study. Setting: Outpatient and community settings in Italy. Participants: A sample of 340 patients with MCC and care partner dyads was recruited between 2017 and 2018. Methods: We measured patient's self-care and care partner contributions to self-care in dyads using the Self-care of Chronic Illness Inventory and the Caregiver Contribution to Self-care of Chronic Illness Inventory. To control for dyadic interdependence, we performed a multilevel modelling analysis. Results: Patients’ and care partners’ mean ages were 76.65 (± 7.27) and 54.32 (± 15.25), respectively. Most care partners were female and adult children or grandchildren. The most prevalent chronic conditions in patients were diabetes (74%) and heart failure (34%). Patients and care partners reported higher levels of self-care monitoring than self-care maintenance and management behaviours. Important patient clinical determinants of self-care included cognitive status, number of medications and type of chronic condition. Care partner determinants of self-care contributions included age, gender, education, perceived income, care partner burden, caregiving hours per week and the presence of a secondary care partner. Conclusions: Our findings support the importance of taking a dyadic approach when focusing on patients with MCC and their care partners. More dyadic longitudinal research is recommended to reveal the modifiable determinants of self-care and the complex relationships between patients

Aim: To develop the Self-Care in COVID-19 (SCOVID) scale and to test its psychometric characteristics in the general population. Methods: We tested SCOVID scale content validity with 19 experts. For factorial and construct validity, reliability, and measurement error, we administered the 20-item SCOVID scale to a sample of 461 Italians in May/June 2020 (mean age: 48.8, SD ± 15.8). Results: SCOVID scale item content validity ranged between 0.85–1.00, and the total scale content validity was 0.94. Confirmatory factor analysis supported SCOVID scale factorial validity (comparative fit index = 0.91; root mean square error of approximation = 0.05). Construct validity was supported by significant correlations with other instrument scores measuring self-efficacy, positivity, quality of life, anxiety, and depression. Reliability estimates were good with factor score determinacy, composite reliability, global reliability index, Cronbach’s alpha, and test-retest reliability ranging between 0.71–0.91. The standard error of measurement was adequate. Conclusions: The SCOVID scale is a new instrument measuring self-care in the COVID-19 pandemic with adequate validity and reliability. The SCOVID scale can be used in practice and research for assessing self-care in the COVID-19 pandemic to preventing COVID-19 infection and maintaining wellbeing in the general population.

Rationale: Patients who have multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) and their informal caregivers experience poorer health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Perceived social support has been shown to influence HRQOL. Objectives: This study aimed at identifying the differences between patients' and caregivers' physical and mental HRQOL; and determining the association between their perception of social support from different sources, and their own and their dyad partner's HRQOL. Method: Patients with MCCs and their caregivers (345 dyads) were enrolled in a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted in Italy. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support measured perceived social support from family, friends, and significant others, and the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey measured the physical and mental component of HRQOL in dyads. The dyadic analysis was conducted using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model through structural equation modelling. Results: Family support perceived by each member of the dyad was associated positively with their own mental HRQOL, and that family support perceived by caregivers was also associated positively with patients’ mental HRQOL. Greater family support perceived by caregivers was also associated with better physical HRQOL in both caregivers and patients. Moreover, greater friend-support perceived by each member of the dyad was positively associated with own physical HRQOL. Conclusions: The study suggests the reciprocal influence of perceived social support from family and friends on physical and mental HRQOL in MCC dyads. Healthcare professionals should identify those people who are the main sources of support for each member of the dyad, and develop care plans that promote the maintenance and enhancing of this support.

Having a retro-auricular left ventricular assist device (LVAD) requires patients to learn specific self-care behaviors, with a considerable burden; the present study aimed at exploring and describing the experience of self-care in this population. An Interpretive Description was conducted, informing the analysis with the Middle-Range Theory of Self-care of Chronic Illness. A purposeful sample of ten people with a retro-auricular LVAD participated in in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Four themes were identified: Innovations and Limitations in Daily Life, Problems Detection, Response to Problems, and Learning Process. All of these were deeply influenced by a cross-cutting theme: Support System. People with a retro-auricular LVAD have self-care needs different from those of people with heart failure or with the abdominal version of the device, and there is a great need for targeted intervention that could be developed in consideration of our findings.