Positive personal resources and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: resilience, optimism, hope, courage, trait mindfulness, and self-efficacy in breast cancer patients and survivors.

PURPOSE: This study aims to understand the association between positive personal resources (i.e., optimism, hope, courage, trait mindfulness, and self-efficacy), resilience, and psychological distress (i.e., anxiety, depression, stress) in women with breast cancer and breast cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that personal positive resources can directly influence resilience, which in turn prevented psychological distress. METHODS: The research sample consisted of 409 Italian women (49% patients, 51% survivors) who were administered a questionnaire to assess positive resources, resiliency, and distress. structural equation model (SEM) analysis was carried out to confirm the hypothetical-theoretical model. RESULTS: Personal positive resources had a direct positive effect on resilience, which prevented from distress. These results were observed across cancer patients and survivors, and regardless the level of direct exposure to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: In both patients and survivors, the relationships between positive personal resources, resilience, and psychological distress is strong enough to be not influenced by the level of exposure to COVID-19 and despite COVID-19 pandemic caused the disruption of active treatment plans and delays in routine check-ups. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Implications of this study suggest the urgency to screen positive resources and to identify women with lower resilience and a potentially higher susceptibility to develop psychological distress. For these women, our findings suggest the implementation of psychological interventions that build resilience.

What About the Different Shortened Versions of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale?

Given the mixed conclusions on the psychometric properties of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) and the variety of subsets of items identified as abbreviated forms, the current study aimed to (a) further investigate the performance of single items and different combinations of items of the MAAS from within an Item Response Theory framework, (b) to expand upon existing knowledge about the coverage of the construct of the scale and its shortened versions. A sample of 914 participants (67.6% women; mean age 23.28, SD = 4.77) completed the MAAS. To fulfill the second aim of the study, of the total sample, two subsamples (N = 156 and N = 158, respectively) were administered a battery of self-report questionnaires. Analyses attested that four items of the MAAS have weak psychometric properties and that the reliability of the scale remains unchanged when these items are excluded. The relationships with several constructs (consciousness, present-time attitude, emotional intelligence, alexithymia, emotion regulation strategies, behavioral inhibition and activation, affect, anxiety, and depression) provided evidence that the scale adequately reflects the operationalization of the construct, although some facets of the construct are only partially covered. The current findings confirm that the MAAS might be slightly shortened without reducing its reliability and validity, but drastically abbreviated forms, such as the proposed five-item version, fail to maintain adequate psychometric properties.

Hope Herth Index (HHI): a validation study in Italian patients with solid and hematological malignancies on active cancer treatment.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Although hope is a widely used term, the experience of hope in patients with chronic or even life-threatening diseases is often disregarded due to the scarcity of carefully designed and validated assessment tools. The aim of this study was to validate the Hope Herth Index (HHI) questionnaire in the Italian population of patients with solid or hematological malignancies during active cancer treatment. METHODS: After the translation procedures, the psychometric properties of the Italian version of HHI were evaluated in 266 patients with non-advanced cancer cared for in four different settings. Summative scores ranged from 12-48, with a higher score denoting greater hope. Confirmative factorial analysis was performed to assess dimensionality. The test-retest reliability was assessed by means of the Lin concordance coefficient (two weeks' interval, 80 patients). Concurrent validity was assessed through the following questionnaires: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being (FACIT-Sp), Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), and System Belief Inventory (SBI-15R). RESULTS: A total of 266 patients were enrolled. Confirmative factor analysis did not confirm the original three-factor solution, whereas a one-factor solution did perform well. Cronbach's alpha was 0.84 and the test-retest reliability was 0.64 (95% CI 0.51; 0.76). Large convergence was found with spiritual well-being as measured by the FACIT-Sp (0.69) and with anxiety-depression as measured by the HADS (inverse correlation: -0.51). Physical symptoms and religiousness were only slightly correlated, as expected. CONCLUSIONS: The Italian version of HHI is a valid and reliable assessment tool - useful to initiate conversation with someone who is troubled but finds it difficult to talk - in patients with either solid or hematological malignancies on active cancer treatment during the non-advanced stages of the disease.