No abstract

The end-of-life trajectory of cancer patients in palliative care (PC) elicits an anticipatory grief (AG) process in family caregivers (FCs). Although widely recognized, AG lacks conceptual clarification. This study aims to qualitatively explore the experience of FCs of patients with terminal cancer to identify the core characteristics and the specific adaptive challenges related to AG in the context of end-of-life caregiving. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted in a clinical sample of 26 FCs of cancer patients in PC. Findings from thematic analysis suggest that the AG experience is characterized by traumatic distress from being exposed to life-threatening conditions and the separation distress induced by loss anticipation and current relational losses, challenging the FCs to long-term emotional regulation effort demands. These results contribute to the conceptualization of AG and may inform intervention programs for the main challenges the FCs face when adjusting to loss during end-of-life caregiving.

Background and objectives: Inhalers mishandling remain an important clinical issue worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate inhalation technique in stable COPD out-patients. The variables under study were type of inhaler device (ID), patients’ preference for an inhaler, number of IDs used by each patient, beliefs about inhaler medication and some demographic, clinical and functional patients' characteristics. We aim to assess how they are related to inhalation technique. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in a hospital outpatient respiratory care. COPD patients over 40 years old, diagnosed according to GOLD criteria, and using IDs were included consecutively. The Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ), a demographic and a clinical survey were applied. The number of IDs used by each patient and the patients’ preference for some IDs were recorded. Patients were asked to demonstrate the use of their prescribed inhalation devices, and inhaler technique was assessed by using previously defined checklists, including essential steps and critical errors. A statistics analysis was then performed. Results: We studied 300 subjects performing a total of 521 inhalation manoeuvers with 10 different IDs. At least one step incorrectly performed was found in 48.2% of demonstrations and in 29.9% critical errors were observed. Misuse was related to priming/loading in 6.9%, to inhalation manoeuver in 13.1% and to both in 10%. There was a statistically significant association between critical errors and type of ID ( P <0.001). No significant relationship was found between correct performance of key manoeuvers and patients’ preference or number of inhalers used per patient. Misuse due to critical errors was observed in 39.3% of patients and was positively related to female gender, age ≥65, lower education level and lower socioeconomic status (higher Graffar classification score), but not to patients’ clinical or functional characteristics. In the sub-group of patients presenting critical errors when using IDs, there was a statistically significant inverse association between BMQ Necessity score and number of critical errors. Conclusions: Inhalers mishandling remains disappointingly common. A good inhalation technique depends on the type of ID, and failure of inhalation manoeuver was the main cause of ID misuse. It was not associated to multiple inhalers’ use nor to patient’s preference, but to the patient’s beliefs about the necessity to use them. Elderly patients, women and those with lower education level or lower socioeconomic status demonstrate a worse inhalation technique.

Background and objectiveAdherence to inhaled medications by COPD patients is a challenging issue, but relatively understudied. The aim of this study is the characterization of adherence to inhaled medications by COPD patients, with a focus on patient-related determinants.MethodsStable COPD outpatients ≥40 years of age from a respiratory unit and diagnosed according to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease criteria were included in a cross-sectional study. The Measure of Treatment Adherence (MTA), the Beliefs about Medications Questionnaire (BMQ) and demographic, clinical, and COPD questionnaires were used. After completing these questionnaires, semi-structured interviews were carried out and participants were encouraged to justify their opinions and behaviors. Field notes were made during the interviews and each interview was analyzed before the next one. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of the variables were then performed.ResultsA total of 300 out of 319 participants (mean age =67.7 years, 78.1% males) completed the MTA questionnaire. Of these, 31.3% were considered poorly adherent and 16.7% as non-adherent to the inhaled therapy. A statistically significant negative association was found between adherence and current smoking status (P=0.044), and between adherence and FEV1% (P=0.000). The mean BMQ Necessity score was higher in adherent patients (P=0.000), but the the mean Concern score was similar for both (P=0.877). We found nine patterns of poor-adherence, six reasons given for poor-adherence behaviors, five reasons for good-adherence behaviors and three patient-related domains on adherence to medications.ConclusionAdherence is related to need perception and to the functional severity of the disease. A non-adherent patient is usually a current smoker with lower degree of airflow limitation and lower perception of medication necessity. New information obtained was related to the patterns and reasons for different adherence behaviors, which are based on three major groups of patient related-determinants: health-related experiences, health-related behaviors and health-related beliefs.

This article reviews the effectiveness of physical activity (PA) interventions at the workplace to reduce musculoskeletal pain among employees and assesses the effect size of these programs using meta-analysis. Four databases (i.e., PubMed, EBSCO, Web of Science, and Cochrane) were searched for research trials, which included comparison groups of employees that assessed PA programs, musculoskeletal pain, and health-related behaviors, published between January 1990 and March 2013. The meta-analysis estimates of standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) present significant evidence of less general pain (g = -.40 with a 95% confidence interval [CI] = [-0.78, -0.02]) and neck and shoulder pain (g = -.37 with a 95% CI = [-0.63, -0.12]) in intervention groups. The few studies of low back pain and arm, elbow, wrist, hand, or finger pain did not present sufficient statistically significant evidence. Consistent evidence demonstrates that workplace PA interventions significantly reduce general musculoskeletal pain and neck and shoulder pain. More studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of work-related PA interventions for arm, elbow, wrist, hand or finger, and low back pain.