Globally, approximately one in three of all adults suffer from multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). This review provides a comprehensive overview of the resulting epidemiological, economic and patient burden.There is no agreed taxonomy for MCCs, with several terms used interchangeably and no agreed definition, resulting in up to three-fold variation in prevalence rates: from 16% to 58% in UK studies, 26% in US studies and 9.4% in Urban South Asians.Certain conditions cluster together more frequently than expected, with associations of up to three-fold, e.g. depression associated with stroke and with Alzheimer's disease, and communicable conditions such as TB and HIV/AIDS associated with diabetes and CVD, respectively. Clusters are important as they may be highly amenable to large improvements in health and cost outcomes through relatively simple shifts in healthcare delivery.Healthcare expenditures greatly increase, sometimes exponentially, with each additional chronic condition with greater specialist physician access, emergency department presentations and hospital admissions. The patient burden includes a deterioration of quality of life, out of pocket expenses, medication adherence, inability to work, symptom control and a high toll on carers. This high burden from MCCs is further projected to increase.Recommendations for interventions include reaching consensus on the taxonomy of MCC, greater emphasis on MCCs research, primary prevention to achieve compression of morbidity, a shift of health systems and policies towards a multiple-condition framework, changes in healthcare payment mechanisms to facilitate this change and shifts in health and epidemiological databases to include MCCs.
Objective Optimism and social support serve as protective factors against distress in medically ill patients. Very few studies have specifically explored the ways in which these variables interact to impact quality of life (QOL), particularly among patients with advanced cancer. The present study examined the role of optimism as a moderator of the relationship between social support and anxiety, depression, hopelessness, and QOL among patients with advanced cancer. Methods Participants (N = 168) completed self-report assessments of psychosocial, spiritual, and physical well-being, including social support, optimism, hopelessness, depressive and anxious symptoms, and QOL. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to determine the extent to which social support and optimism were associated with depressive and anxious symptomatology, hopelessness and QOL, and the potential role of optimism as a moderator of the relationship between social support and these variables. Results Higher levels of optimism were significantly associated with fewer anxious and depressive symptoms, less hopelessness and better QOL. Higher levels of perceived social support were also significantly associated with better QOL. Additionally, optimism moderated the relationship between social support and anxiety, such that there was a strong negative association between social support and anxiety for participants with low optimism. Conclusions This study highlights the importance of optimism and social support in the QOL of patients with advanced cancer. As such, interventions that attend to patients’ expectations for positive experiences and the expansion of social support should be the focus of future clinical and research endeavors.
Introduction The objective was to systematically review studies on health outcomes from smokeless tobacco (SLT) products. Methods We analysed published literature on the health outcomes from SLT use between 01/01/2015 to 01/02/2020, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Results Of 53 studies included, six were global, 32 from Asia, Middle East and Africa (AMEA), nine from USA and six from Europe. ‘Poor’-rated studies predominated (23;43%), in particular, for global (4;66%) and AMEA (16;50%). Health outcomes differed between SLT-products and regions; those in AMEA were associated with higher mortality (overall, cancer, Coronary heart disease (CHD), respiratory but not cardiovascular disease (CVD)), and morbidity (CVD, oral and head and neck cancers), with odds ratios up to 38.7. European studies showed no excess mortality (overall, CVD, from cancers) or morbidity (ischemic heart disease (IHD), stroke, oral, head and neck, pancreatic or colon cancers) from several meta-analyses; single studies reported elevated risk of rectal cancer and respiratory disorders. Pooled study data showed protection against developing Parkinson’s disease. US studies showed mixed results for mortality (raised overall, CHD, cancer and smoking-related cancer mortality; no excess risk of respiratory or CVD mortality). Morbidity outcomes were also mixed, with some evidence of increased IHD, stroke and cancer risk (oral, head and neck). No studies reported on switching from cigarettes to SLT-products. Conclusion Our review demonstrates stark differences between different SLT-products in different regions, ranging from zero harm from European snus to greatly increased health risks in AMEA. The literature on the safety profile for SLT-products for harm reduction is incomplete and potentially misinforming policy and regulation.
Purpose: Spirituality is an important component of the cancer experience. This study aims to assess characteristics of spiritual health following a cancer diagnosis, and evaluate the relationship between spiritual change and the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among a population-based cohort of cancer survivors. Method: A mailed, cross-sectional survey was completed by 614 cancer survivors identified through the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry. All subjects were 3 to 4.5 years postdiagnosis. Relationships between various characteristics of spiritual health and CAM use were examined, along with clinical and sociodemographic factors. Results: Although large proportions of individuals reported that having cancer had positively affected their spiritual well-being (eg, 40.3% experienced highly positive spiritual changes, 68% felt a high sense of purpose, 75.9% reported being very hopeful), some individuals experienced negative spiritual change (36.1%) and continued to experience high levels of uncertainty (27.2%). In multivariate analyses, those survivors who felt spiritual life became more important (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.21-3.04, P = .006), or experienced positive changes resulting from the cancer experience (AOR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.26-3.15, P = .003), were more likely to use CAM than those who stated otherwise. Conclusions: Having cancer affects many different aspects of spiritual well-being, both positively and negatively. Positive changes and increased spiritual importance appear to be associated with the use of CAM. Prospective research is needed to test whether integrating CAM into conventional cancer care systems will facilitate positive, spiritually transformative processes among diverse groups of cancer survivors.
Spirituality plays a central role in the cancer experience of this underserved ethnically-diverse population. While spirituality seems to be a universal concern in advanced cancer patients, the meaning of spirituality differs across individuals, with some equating it with organized religion and others taking a more individualized approach. It is important that psychosocial interventions are developed to address this concern. Future research is needed to further explore the different ways that patients conceptualize spirituality and to develop spiritually-based treatments that are not "one size fits all."
We conducted a scoping review of studies on health outcomes from electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). The objective was to identify, narratively synthesize, assess the strength and quality of evidence and critically appraise studies that have reported disease end points associated with the use of ENDS. We included published literature on the health impact of ENDS from 01/01/2015 until 01/02/2020 following the PRISMA guidelines using PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Google Scholar. The database search identified 755 studies, and other sources 265; 37 studies met final eligibility criteria. Levels of evidence included 24(65%) cross-sectional, one (2.7%) case–control and six (16%) case studies, four (11%) cohort studies, one (2.7%) randomized controlled trial (RCT) and one (2.7%) meta-analysis; 27(73%) studies reported only on harms, eight (22%) reported on benefits, two (2%) on benefits and harms. Quality ratings were poor in 20 (54%), fair in 9(24%) and good in 8(22%) of studies. In our review, ENDS was not shown to be causative for harmful cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes and shown to be beneficial for hypertensive patients. Switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes resulted in reduced exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with no evidence of long-term deterioration in lung function. Mental Health, cancer and mortality were not adequately studied to form any consensus. Our review has not demonstrated ENDS to be causative of harmful CVD outcomes; furthermore switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes was associated with improved hypertensive control and reduced exacerbations of COPD, with no evidence of increased asthma risk or long-term respiratory harm. Mental health, cancer and mortality outcomes have not been adequately studied to form a conclusion. Overall, the findings of our review did not provide evidence to counter the consensus held by many that ENDS use is safer than the risks posed from smoking cigarettes.
Objectives Subjective reports on the effectiveness of and satisfaction with writing interventions in medical populations have indicated that they can have a profound impact on patients. Further, past research on these programs has demonstrated that they can lead to a number of different positive outcomes depending on the personal characteristics of the participating patients and the type of writing with which they are tasked. For this reason, a flexible and individually tailored writing intervention may be particularly effective for patients, molding its approach to their desires and backgrounds. This paper examines Visible Ink, a writing program for cancer patients at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) that follows this model. Methods At Visible Ink’s First Fall Writing Festival in November 2012, an optional survey was provided to all program participants in attendance, capturing both quantitative and qualitative information on patient experiences in the program. Twenty-nine surveys were completed. Results The program appears to have a variety of positive effects, including fostering personal growth and providing a positive distraction. Respondents reported that they write in a number of different genres on topics both related and not related to their illnesses, which supports the flexible model of the program. All respondents indicated that they would recommend the program to others, and satisfaction with the program’s general approach (i.e., individualized work with a writing coach) was unanimous. A few areas for potential improvement were also identified, most of which involved expanding the services and events offered by the program. Significance of results Despite the limitations of this survey (e.g., small sample size and low response rate), its results support the promise of the Visible Ink model and demonstrate participants’ satisfaction with the program. Future research can more thoroughly examine Visible Ink’s effectiveness, and additional resources could enable the program to expand.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.