ObjectiveIn approaching the study and practice of heart failure (HF) management, authors recognise that the patient–doctor relationship has a central role in engaging patients in their care. This study aims at identifying the features and the levers of HF patient engagement and suggestions for orienting clinical encounters.DesignUsing a grounded theory approach, we conducted 22 in-depth interviews (13 patients with HF, 5 physicians and 4 caregivers). Data were collected and analysed using open, axial and selective coding procedures according to the grounded theory principles.SettingsAll interviews were conducted in an office in a university hospital located in a metropolitan area of Milan, Italy.ParticipantsThe data comprised a total of 22 patient, hospital cardiologist and caregiver interviews. Patients aged ≥18 years with New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Class of II or III were eligible to take part. Patients were recruited primarily through their referral cardiologist.ResultsThe HF patient engagement process develops in four main phases that are characterised by different patients’ emotional, cognitive and behavioural dynamics that contribute to shape the process of a patient's meaning making towards health and illness regarding their care. The emerging model illustrates that HF patient engagement entails a meaning-making process enacted by the patient after the critical event. This implies patients’ ability to give sense to their care experience and to their disease, symptomatology and treatments, and their changes along their illness course. Doctors are recognised as crucial in fostering patients’ engagement along all the phases of the process as they contribute to providing patients with self-continuity and give new meaning to their illness experience.ConclusionsThis study identifies the core experiential domains and the main levers involved in driving patients with HF to effectively engage in their disease management. The model emerging from this study may help clinicians think in a fresh way about encounters with patients and their role in fostering their patients’ health engagement.

Topographic analysis of spontaneous and steady-state visual evoked brain electrical activity was carried out between attacks in 82 migraine patients (40 youths and 42 adults). In adult migraine with aura a significant increase of delta rhythm percentage power was observed compared with migraine without aura and age-matched controls. Children suffering from migraine both with aura and without aura had an increased theta rhythm compared to normal controls. The presence of alpha interhemispheric asymmetry discriminated between migraine with aura and without aura, just as in adults. An increased amplitude of the SVEP F1 component with a tendency to the spread of visual reactivity was observed in juvenile migraine with and without aura; this pattern was not dissimilar from the one previously observed in adult migraine with and without aura. Abnormal photic driving in migraine is independent of age and type of migraine.

No abstract

Background In January 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) started to spread in Italy. The Italian government adopted urgent measures to slow its spread. Enforcing compliance with such measures is crucial in order to enhance their effectiveness. Engaging citizens in the COVID-19 preventive process is urgent today both in Italy and around the world. However, to the best of our knowledge, no previous studies have investigated the role of health engagement in predicting citizens' compliance with health emergency containment measures. Method An online survey was administered between February 28 and March 4, 2020 on a representative sample of 1000 Italians. The questionnaire included a measure of health engagement (Patient Health Engagement Scale), a 5-item Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7, resulting in 4 positions that describe the psychological readiness to be active in one's own health management, and a series of ad hoc items intended to measure citizens' perceived susceptibility and severity of the disease, orientation towards health management, trust in institutional bodies, health habits and food consumption. To investigate the relationship between health engagement and these variables, ANOVA analysis, logistic regression and contingency tables with Pearson's chi-squared analysis have been carried out. Results Less engaged people show higher levels of perceived susceptibility to the virus and severity of the disease; they are less trustful of scientific and healthcare authorities, they feel less self-effective in managing their own health-both in normal conditions and under stress-PLOS ONE

Currently we observe a gap between theory and practices of patient engagement. If both scholars and health practitioners do agree on the urgency to realize patient engagement, no shared guidelines exist so far to orient clinical practice. Despite a supportive policy context, progress to achieve greater patient engagement is patchy and slow and often concentrated at the level of policy regulation without dialoguing with practitioners from the clinical field as well as patients and families. Though individual clinicians, care teams and health organizations may be interested and deeply committed to engage patients and family members in the medical course, they may lack clarity about how to achieve this goal. This contributes to a wide “system” inertia—really difficult to be overcome—and put at risk any form of innovation in this filed. As a result, patient engagement risk today to be a buzz words, rather than a real guidance for practice. To make the field clearer, we promoted an Italian Consensus Conference on Patient Engagement (ICCPE) in order to set the ground for drafting recommendations for the provision of effective patient engagement interventions. The ICCPE will conclude in June 2017. This document reports on the preliminary phases of this process. In the paper, we advise the importance of “fertilizing a patient engagement ecosystem”: an oversimplifying approach to patient engagement promotion appears the result of a common illusion. Patient “disengagement” is a symptom that needs a more holistic and complex approach to solve its underlined causes. Preliminary principles to promote a patient engagement ecosystem are provided in the paper.