Measurement equivalence of the English and French versions of the self-efficacy to manage chronic disease scale: a Scleroderma Patient-Centered Intervention Network (SPIN) study.

PURPOSE: The Self-Efficacy to Manage Chronic Disease (SEMCD) scale is widely used, including in systemic sclerosis (SSc). The SEMCD has been validated in SSc, but the metric equivalence of the English and French versions has not been assessed (i.e., whether psychometric properties are equivalent across English and French). METHODS: Participants were adults from the Scleroderma Patient-Centered Intervention Network (SPIN) Cohort (N = 2159) who completed baseline measures in English (n = 1473) or French (n = 686) between May 2014 to July 2020. Analyses assessed internal consistency reliability via Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega, convergent validity via Pearson's correlations, structural validity via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and differential item functioning via the Multiple-Indicator Multiple-Cause (MIMIC) model. RESULTS: Internal consistency reliability was high in English (α = .93, ω = .93) and French (α = .92, ω = .93). All correlations between the SEMCD and measures of health outcomes were moderate to large, statistically significant, and in the hypothesized direction in both languages. The CFA demonstrated that the one-factor model of self-efficacy, overall, fit reasonably well (CFI = .96, TLI = .93, SRMR = .03, RMSEA = .14). Standardized factor loadings were large (.76 to .88). Three items displayed statistically significant uniform DIF and all six displayed nonuniform DIF; all DIF was of minimal magnitude. Comparison of unadjusted and DIF-adjusted models indicated that DIF did not meaningfully impact total score (ICC = 0.999, r = 0.999). CONCLUSION: Scores from English- and French-speaking adults with SSc can be combined for analysis or compared.

Moderators of Loneliness Trajectories in People with Systemic Sclerosis During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A SPIN COVID-19 Cohort Longitudinal Study.

BACKGROUND: Many individuals with systemic sclerosis (SSc) are at heightened risk for COVID-19 related morbidity and isolation due to interstitial lung disease, frailty, and immunosuppressant use. Minimal research has explored loneliness predictors in individuals with chronic illnesses during COVID-19. This study evaluated moderators of loneliness trajectories in individuals with SSc during COVID-19. METHODS: Longitudinal data were analyzed across 30 timepoints from April 2020 to May 2022 from 775 adults in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) COVID-19 Cohort. Hierarchical linear modeling evaluated cross-level moderators of loneliness trajectories, including marital status, baseline number of household members, number of virtual or telephone one-on-one or virtual group conversations, number of hours spent enjoying in-person household conversations or activities, and satisfaction with quality of in-person household conversations (all in the past week). Level-1 moderation analyses assessed effects of conversation, activity, and satisfaction means and slopes over time. RESULTS: Baseline values were not statistically significant moderators of loneliness trajectories. Higher mean (averaged over time) virtual or telephone one-on-one and in-person household conversations, in-person household activity, and in-person household conversation satisfaction were associated with lower loneliness trajectories (ps < .05). The relationship between in-person household conversation satisfaction and loneliness trajectory was statistically significantly but minimally attenuated over time (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: For people with SSc, higher mean conversation, activity, and satisfaction variables were associated with lower levels of loneliness during the pandemic, but changes in these social variables were generally not predictive of changes in loneliness.

To Operate or Not to Operate? Reconstructive Surgical Burden and Quality of Life of Pediatric Patients with Facial Differences.

OBJECTIVE: The Craniofacial Condition Quality of Life Scale (CFC-QoL) was used to evaluate the relationship between surgical burden and quality of life (QoL). DESIGN: Patient-parent dyads completed the CFC-QoL which queries the following QoL domains: Bullying, Peer Problems, Psychological Impact, Family Support, Appearance Satisfaction, and Desire for Appearance Change. Stepwise multivariate linear regressions were performed for each QoL domain. SETTING: Urban tertiary care center. PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Pediatric patients with facial differences, and their parents. INTERVENTION: Survey study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Demographic, diagnostic, and surgical characteristics were collected. Surgical burden was calculated as the standard deviation from the mean number of surgeries per diagnostic cohort. RESULT: Patients (N = 168) were majority female (57.1%) and Hispanic (64.3%). Diagnoses were cleft lip and/or palate (CLP,n = 99) or other craniofacial conditions (CFC,n = 69). Average patient age was 2.3 ± 5.6 years at first reconstructive surgery and 12.3 ± 3.4 years at study enrollment. Patients received an average of 4.3 ± 4.1 reconstructive surgeries.Worse Bullying was associated with higher surgical burden. Worse Peer Problems was associated with higher surgical burden, but only for children with non-CLP CFCs. Worse Family Support was associated with CFC diagnosis, female sex, and higher surgical burden. Worse Psychological Impact was associated with higher surgical burden. Worse Appearance Satisfaction was associated with younger age and with lower surgical burden. Greater Desire for Appearance Change was associated with older age, higher surgical burden, CLP diagnosis, female sex, and non-Hispanic ethnicity. Socioeconomic status did not predict QoL per patient self- or parent-proxy report. CONCLUSIONS: Higher surgical burden was associated with worse QoL outcomes in multiple domains.

A telehealth intervention for symptom management, distress, and adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients taking adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) after breast cancer face adherence challenges and symptom-related distress. We conducted a randomized trial to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a telehealth intervention (Symptom-Targeted Randomized Intervention for Distress and Adherence to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy [STRIDE]) for patients taking AET. METHODS: From October 2019 to June 2021, 100 patients reporting difficulty with AET were randomly assigned to either STRIDE or a medication monitoring (MedMon) control group. STRIDE included six weekly small-group videoconferencing sessions and two individual calls. We defined feasibility as having >50% of eligible patients enroll, >70% complete the 12-week assessment, and > 70% of STRIDE patients complete ≥4/6 sessions. We monitored adherence with the Medication Event Monitoring System Caps (MEMS Caps). At baseline and 12- and 24-weeks after baseline, patients self-reported adherence (Medication Adherence Report Scale), AET satisfaction (Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire), symptom distress (Breast Cancer Prevention Trial-Symptom Checklist), self-management of symptoms (Self-efficacy for Symptom Management-AET), coping (Measure of Current Status), quality of life (QOL; Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast), and mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). We used linear mixed effects models to assess the effect of STRIDE on longitudinal outcomes. RESULTS: We enrolled 70.9% (100/141) of eligible patients; 92% completed the 12-week assessment, and 86% completed ≥4/6 STRIDE sessions. Compared with MedMon, STRIDE patients reported less symptom distress (B[difference] = -1.91; 95% CI, -3.29 to -0.52; p = .007) and better self-management of AET symptoms, coping, QOL, and mood. We did not observe significant differences in AET satisfaction or adherence. CONCLUSIONS: STRIDE is feasible and acceptable, showing promise for improving outcomes in patients taking AET after breast cancer. LAY SUMMARY: Patients taking adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) after breast cancer may face challenges while following their treatment regimen. In this randomized controlled trial of 100 patients taking AET, a brief, small-group virtual intervention (STRIDE) was well-received by patients and led to improvements in how upset patients were due to symptoms, how confident they were in managing symptoms, and how well they could cope with stress. Thus, STRIDE is a promising intervention and should be tested in future multi-site trials.

Study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial of a virtual intervention (STRIDE) for symptom management, distress and adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy after breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Patient adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) after a diagnosis of hormone-sensitive breast cancer is poor. Previous interventions have failed to produce changes in adherence, address patient preferences or include theoretically informed and evidence-based components. Therefore, we iteratively developed a patient-centred, evidence-based, small-group, videoconference intervention to improve adherence and symptom management as well as reduce distress for patients taking AET after breast cancer (Symptom-Targeted Randomised Intervention for Distress and Adherence to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy, STRIDE). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The current study is a non-blinded, randomised, controlled, feasibility trial of STRIDE compared with a medication monitoring control group. The primary objective is to examine the feasibility and acceptability of STRIDE, while secondary objectives are to assess changes in objective and subjective adherence, symptom distress and satisfaction with AET. Patients will be recruited from the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts. The total number of patients accrued will be 75, with ≥60 patients completing the study. All patients will store their AET in an electronic pill bottle for objective adherence monitoring. Patients randomly assigned to the STRIDE intervention will receive 6 weekly 1-hour sessions, in small groups of two, delivered via videoconferencing by a trained mental health professional. Patients assigned to the control group will store their medication in the electronic pill bottle and receive follow-up oncology care as usual. All participants will complete self-report psychosocial measures at baseline, 12 weeks and 24 weeks postbaseline. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health and is approved by the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Institutional Review Board (Protocol #18-603, V.1.2, first approval date 1 February 2019). The study will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement for non-pharmacological trials. Results will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals, presented at scientific meetings and disseminated to patient organisations and media outlets.Trial registration numberNCT03837496; Pre-results.

Development and Refinement of a Telehealth Intervention for Symptom Management, Distress, and Adherence to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy after Breast Cancer.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) prevents recurrence after early stage, hormone sensitive breast cancer; however, adherence to AET is suboptimal, and efficacious interventions are severely lacking. Barriers to adherence are well established; however, interventions, thus, far have failed to produce meaningful changes in adherence and have generally not followed guiding principles of psychosocial intervention development. The purpose of this paper is to describe the iterative development, using the National Institutes of Health Stage Model for Behavioral Intervention Development, of an evidence-based, patient-centered, telehealth intervention to enhance adherence, improve symptom management, and reduce distress for patients taking AET after breast cancer, with a focus on (1) a small open pilot study which informed modifications and refinement of the intervention based on quantitative and qualitative patient feedback about feasibility and acceptability and (2) the underlying theoretical and empirical rationale for each component of the finalized intervention. Clinical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Concept mapping study of stakeholder perceptions of implementation of cognitive-behavioral social skills training on assertive community treatment teams.

This study aimed to identify factors associated with implementation of cognitive behavioral social skills training (CBSST) on assertive community treatment (ACT) teams in a large public sector behavioral health system. This study used concept mapping (a mixed-method approach) and involved a sample including diverse stakeholder participants including patients, ACT team members, team leaders, organization leaders, and system leaders. We identified 14 distinct issues related to implementing CBSST on ACT teams: (a) CBSST fit with ACT structure, (b) CBSST fit with ACT process, (c) provider perceptions about CBSST, (d) staff pressures/other demands; (e) CBSST and ACT synergy, (f) client characteristics, (g) benefits of CBSST, (h) coordination/interaction among ACT providers, (i) government/regulatory factors, (j) integration of CBSST into ACT, (k) training support, (l) training resources, (m) multilevel agency leadership, and (n) provider characteristics. Each of these dimensions were rated in regard to importance and changeability with the top 5 rated dimensions including effective training support; alignment of leadership across levels of the community-based organizations delivering services; perceived benefits of CBSST, CBSST and ACT synergy; and provider perceptions of CBSST. The most critical issues for CBSST implementation on ACT teams should be addressed in future studies. Implementation strategies that capitalize on enhancing leadership and organizational climate hold promise to address all of these issues. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).