Psychosocial aspects in cardiac rehabilitation: From theory to practice. A position paper from the Cardiac Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation of the European Society of Cardiology

A large body of empirical research shows that psychosocial risk factors (PSRFs) such as low socio-economic status, social isolation, stress, type-D personality, depression and anxiety increase the risk of incident coronary heart disease (CHD) and also contribute to poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and prognosis in patients with established CHD. PSRFs may also act as barriers to lifestyle changes and treatment adherence and may moderate the effects of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Furthermore, there appears to be a bidirectional interaction between PSRFs and the cardiovascular system. Stress, anxiety and depression affect the cardiovascular system through immune, neuroendocrine and behavioural pathways. In turn, CHD and its associated treatments may lead to distress in patients, including anxiety and depression. In clinical practice, PSRFs can be assessed with single-item screening questions, standardised questionnaires, or structured clinical interviews. Psychotherapy and medication can be considered to alleviate any PSRF-related symptoms and to enhance HRQoL, but the evidence for a definite beneficial effect on cardiac endpoints is inconclusive. A multimodal behavioural intervention, integrating counselling for PSRFs and coping with illness should be included within comprehensive CR. Patients with clinically significant symptoms of distress should be referred for psychological counselling or psychologically focused interventions and/or psychopharmacological treatment. To conclude, the success of CR may critically depend on the interdependence of the body and mind and this interaction needs to be reflected through the assessment and management of PSRFs in line with robust scientific evidence, by trained staff, integrated within the core CR team.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett's oesophagus

These guidelines provide a practical and evidence-based resource for the management of patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related early neoplasia. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument was followed to provide a methodological strategy for the guideline development. A systematic review of the literature was performed for English language articles published up until December 2012 in order to address controversial issues in Barrett's oesophagus including definition, screening and diagnosis, surveillance, pathological grading for dysplasia, management of dysplasia, and early cancer including training requirements. The rigour and quality of the studies was evaluated using the SIGN checklist system. Recommendations on each topic were scored by each author using a five-tier system (A+, strong agreement, to D+, strongly disagree). Statements that failed to reach substantial agreement among authors, defined as >80% agreement (A or A+), were revisited and modified until substantial agreement (>80%) was reached. In formulating these guidelines, we took into consideration benefits and risks for the population and national health system, as well as patient perspectives. For the first time, we have suggested stratification of patients according to their estimated cancer risk based on clinical and histopathological criteria. In order to improve communication between clinicians, we recommend the use of minimum datasets for reporting endoscopic and pathological findings. We advocate endoscopic therapy for high-grade dysplasia and early cancer, which should be performed in high-volume centres. We hope that these guidelines will standardise and improve management for patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia.

Applying Health Locus of Control and Latent Class Modelling to food and physical activity choices affecting CVD risk

Health Locus of Control (HLC) classifies our beliefs about the connection between our actions and health outcomes (Skinner, 1996) into three categories: “internal control”, corresponding to health being the result of an individual's effort and habits; “control by powerful others”, whereby health depends on others, such as doctors; and “chance control”, according to which health depends on fate and chance. Using Choice Experiments we investigate the relationship between HLC and willingness to change lifestyle, in terms of eating habits, physical activity and associated cardiovascular disease risk, in a 384 person sample representative of the 40–65 aged population of Northern Ireland administered between February and July 2011. Using latent class analysis we identify three discrete classes of people based on their HLC: the first class is sceptical about their capacity to control their health and certain unhealthy habits. Despite being unsatisfied with their situation, they are reluctant to accept behaviour changes. The second is a group of individuals unhappy with their current situation but willing to change through exercise and diet. Finally, a group of healthy optimists is identified, who are satisfied with their current situation but happy to take more physical activity and improve their diet. Our findings show that any policy designed to modify people's health related behaviour should consider the needs of this sceptical class which represents a considerable proportion of the population in the region.