Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Patient Educ Couns ; 105(1): 182-189, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33975772

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) continues to be a leading cause of morbidity in the U.S. Managing CVD risk factors, such as diabetes or hypertension, can be challenging for many individuals. We investigated the barriers experienced by patients who persistently struggled to reach their CVD risk factor control goals. METHODS: This qualitative study examined patient, clinician, and researcher observations of individuals' experiences in a chronic disease management program. All participants (n = 332) were enrolled in a clinical trial testing a skills-based group intervention seeking to improve healthcare engagement. Data were analyzed through a general inductive approach and resulting themes were structured along the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior framework. RESULTS: Analyses identified care engagement barriers related to participants' communication skills and activation, care team relationship processes, and emotional factors. Although most participants reported benefitting from skills training, persistent barriers included distrust of their providers, shame about health challenges, and dissatisfaction with care team interactions that were described as impersonal or unresponsive. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Efforts to support engagement in CVD risk factor management programs should address whether patients and their care team have the necessary skills, opportunities and confidence to proactively communicate health needs and engage in non-judgmental interactions for goal-setting, rapport-building, and shared decision-making.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Motivation , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Qualitative Research
2.
Evid Based Ment Health ; 24(1): 33-40, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33355291

ABSTRACT

QUESTION: The context for the implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments (EBPTs) often differs from the context in which the treatment was developed, which necessitates adaptations. In this systematic review we build on, and add to, prior approaches by examining the method used to guide such adaptations. In particular, we sought to elucidate the extent to which an empirical process is used. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: We focused on publications describing adaptations made to EBPTs for adults diagnosed with a mental illness. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and Web of Science from database inception to July 2018. Two raters independently coded the articles for the method used to conduct the adaptation, the reason for and nature of the adaptation, and who made the adaptation. FINDINGS: The search produced 20 194 citations, which yielded 152 articles after screening. The most commonly used methods for planned adaptations were literature review (57.7%), clinical intuition (47.0%) and theory (38.9%). The use of data from stakeholder interviews ranked fourth (21.5%) and the use of other types of data (eg, pilot study, experiment, survey, interview) ranked last at fifth (12.1%). Few publications reporting ad hoc adaptations were identified (n=3). CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights a need to (a) educate providers and researchers to carefully consider the methods used for the treatment adaptation process, and to use empirical methods where possible and where appropriate, (b) improve the quality of reporting of stakeholder interviews and (c) develop reporting standards that articulate optimal methods for conducting treatment adaptations.


Subject(s)
Mental Disorders , Adult , Humans , Mental Disorders/therapy , Pilot Projects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...