ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Despite improvements in diabetes monitoring and treatment many patients do not achieve treatment goals. Person-centred approaches have been proposed. However, their practical implementation lags. One barrier is uncertainty about which person-reported outcomes (PROs) should be considered to add the most value. We sought to identify PROs that may be prioritised. METHODS: We used data from a multi-stakeholder Delphi study aimed at developing a person-centred diabetes outcome set and analysed which PROs patients considered important for regular monitoring but healthcare providers less so. Linear regression analyses tested whether belonging to either stakeholder group would predict the importance attributed to an outcome. RESULTS: We found disagreement between patients and healthcare providers on eleven PROs. Stakeholder group predicted perceived importance for ten: self-management behaviours (including performance, perceived importance, motivation, and capacity), sleep quality, diabetes symptoms, screening visit attendance, health status, lifestyle behaviours, and side effects. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that, according to patients' preferences, self-management behaviours, health status and sleep are currently not adequately considered in diabetes management, compromising person-centred care. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This study suggests that prioritising these PROs can facilitate the implementation of more person-centred diabetes monitoring which may support better-informed treatment decisions to achieve treatment goals.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients often encounter psychological challenges due to chronic pain, fatigue, side effects of medications, and disability. This study examines the relationship between autobiographical narratives and recollection patterns in RA patients. We investigated how different recall strategies for positive life events affect the emotional processing of negative episodes. We hypothesized that vividly recalling positive life events provides psychological resources that support a more intense emotional elaboration of stressful memories, allowing individuals to delve deeper into negative life experiences. Additionally, we explored the impact of these perspectives on self-reported well-being and physical health, proposing that re-living positive events improves overall well-being. METHODS: We collected and analyzed high-point and low-point life-story episodes from 60 RA patients (85% female; age mean 61 ± 11 years; range 37-79) using episodic narrative interviews and the Narrative Categorical Content Analysis algorithm (NarrCat). Participants were categorized into 2 clusters based on their temporal perspective during high-point episodes: 25 used a Retrospective viewpoint, while 35 employed a Re-experiencing strategy. Depression and anxiety were assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and functioning was measured using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). RESULTS: The Re-experiencing group, which was more likely to articulate their high-point episode in vivid and real-time narrative, used more psychological perspectives (U(58) = 223, p < 0.01) and showed heightened emotional frequency (U(58) = 280, p < 0.05; positive: U(58) = 328, p < 0.05; negative: U(58) = 278, p < 0.05) in low-point episodes. No significant difference emerged between the two groups regarding psychological state (anxiety, depressive symptoms) and physical impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Vividly recalling positive events may facilitate a deeper exploration of negative memories. The Re-experiencing group showed increased positive emotions during low points, suggesting better emotion regulation. However, no significant association was found between recalling strategies, psychological state, and physical impairment. This indicates that further research is needed to determine whether re-experiencing positive life events is adaptive or maladaptive.