Etes-vous serein face à votre placement? Une étude pilote

Introduction: Des unités d'attente de placement ont vu le jour pour¦répondre à la pénurie de lits d'hébergement de long séjour dans le¦Canton de Vaud et désengorger les hôpitaux aigus. Pour les patients¦qui y sont admis, la décision de placement intervient au sortir d'une¦hospitalisation aiguë, laissant peu de temps à la personne pour¦cheminer face à cette décision. Cette étude pilote vise à investiguer¦le degré de sérénité de ces patients face à l'hébergement de longue¦durée et déterminer s'il existe une relation avec la durée d'attente ou¦le décès en unité d'attente.¦Population et méthode: Personnes âgées (N = 78) admises dans¦une structure d'attente et préparation à l'hébergement de longue¦durée après un séjour hospitalier aigu. Des données démographiques,¦fonctionnelles, cognitives et affectives ont été récoltées dans les 4¦semaines après l'admission. La sérénité ressentie face à l'hébergement¦longue durée a été évaluée à l'aide d'une échelle de type Likert à¦quatre niveaux (pas du tout/plutôt pas/plutôt/tout à fait serein).¦Résultats: Les patients étaient âgés de 85.6 ans en moyenne, 74%¦(58/78) étaient des femmes, 47% (37/78) avaient des troubles cognitifs¦et 35% (27/78) des troubles dépressifs. Globalement 24% (19/78)¦des patients se déclaraient peu ou pas du tout sereins face au¦placement. Comparés aux patients sereins, ces 19 patients étaient¦significativement (p <.05) moins âgés (83.2 ± 1.0 vs 86.8 ± 6.5 ans),¦plus dépendants dans les activités de la vie quotidienne (BAVQ 2.5 ±¦1.7 vs 3.5 ± 1.6), plus déprimés (GDS 15-items 7.0 ± 3.5 vs 4.4 ± 3.0),¦et avaient plus souvent des antécédents de chutes (95% vs 75%). En¦analyse multivariée, le manque de sérénité restait significativement¦associé à une dépendance plus élevée dans les BAVQ, à un score¦GDS plus élevé ainsi qu'aux antécédents de chute. Il n'y avait pas de¦différence significative en termes de durée moyenne de séjour avant le¦placement (90.0 ± 57.3j vs 87.8 ± 73.2, médianes 85 vs 57, P = .45), ni¦de mortalité dans l'unité d'attente (5% vs 5%) entre les deux groupes¦de patients.¦Conclusion: Près d'un quart des patients en unité d'attente se¦déclarent peu sereins face à la perspective du placement. Ces patients¦sont plus dépendants, ont des antécédents de chutes et sont plus¦déprimés, ce qui souligne l'importance d'une identification précoce de¦ces patients afin de leur offrir un soutien dans cette période difficile de¦transition dans leur parcours de vie.

Perception of the damaging effects of smoking, and brief cessation counselling by doctors.

An open prospective study was conducted among the patients visiting an urban medical policlinic for the first time without an appointment to assess whether the immigrants (who represent more than half of our patients) are aware of the health effects of smoking, whether the level of acculturation influences knowledge, and whether doctors give similar advice to Swiss and foreign smokers. 226 smokers, 105 Swiss (46.5%), and 121 foreign-born (53.5%), participated in the study. 32.2% (95% CI [24.4%; 41.1%]) of migrants and 9.6% [5.3%; 16.8%] of Swiss patients were not aware of negative effects of smoking. After adjustment for age, the multivariate model showed that the estimated odds of "ignorance of health effects of smoking" was higher for people lacking mastery of the local language compared with those mastering it (odds ratio (OR) = 7.5 [3.6; 15.8], p < 0.001), and higher for men (OR = 4.3 [1.9; 10.0], p < 0.001). Advice to stop smoking was given with similar frequency to immigrants (31.9% [24.2%; 40.8%] and Swiss patients (29.0% [21.0%; 38.5%]). Nonintegrated patients did not appear to receive less counselling than integrated patients (OR = 1.1 [0.6; 2.1], p = 0.812). We conclude that the level of knowledge among male immigrants not integrated or unable to speak the local language is lower than among integrated foreign-born and Swiss patients. Smoking cessation counselling by a doctor was only given to a minority of patients, but such counselling seemed irrespective of nationality.

Noise in Brain Activity Engenders Perception and Influences Discrimination Sensitivity.

Behavioral and brain responses to identical stimuli can vary with experimental and task parameters, including the context of stimulus presentation or attention. More surprisingly, computational models suggest that noise-related random fluctuations in brain responses to stimuli would alone be sufficient to engender perceptual differences between physically identical stimuli. In two experiments combining psychophysics and EEG in healthy humans, we investigated brain mechanisms whereby identical stimuli are (erroneously) perceived as different (higher vs lower in pitch or longer vs shorter in duration) in the absence of any change in the experimental context. Even though, as expected, participants' percepts to identical stimuli varied randomly, a classification algorithm based on a mixture of Gaussians model (GMM) showed that there was sufficient information in single-trial EEG to reliably predict participants' judgments of the stimulus dimension. By contrasting electrical neuroimaging analyses of auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) to the identical stimuli as a function of participants' percepts, we identified the precise timing and neural correlates (strength vs topographic modulations) as well as intracranial sources of these erroneous perceptions. In both experiments, AEP differences first occurred ∼100 ms after stimulus onset and were the result of topographic modulations following from changes in the configuration of active brain networks. Source estimations localized the origin of variations in perceived pitch of identical stimuli within right temporal and left frontal areas and of variations in perceived duration within right temporoparietal areas. We discuss our results in terms of providing neurophysiologic evidence for the contribution of random fluctuations in brain activity to conscious perception.

Perception of tobacco, cannabis, and alcohol use of others is associated with one's own use.

BACKGROUND: Interventions have been developed to reduce overestimations of substance use among others, especially for alcohol and among students. Nevertheless, there is a lack of knowledge on misperceptions of use for substances other than alcohol. We studied the prevalence of misperceptions of use for tobacco, cannabis, and alcohol and whether the perception of tobacco, cannabis, and alcohol use by others is associated with one's own use. METHODS: Participants (n=5216) in a cohort study from a census of 20-year-old men (N=11,819) estimated the prevalence of tobacco and cannabis use among peers of the same age and sex and the percentage of their peers drinking more alcohol than they did. Using the census data, we determined whether participants overestimated, accurately estimated, or underestimated substance use by others. Regression models were used to compare substance use by those who overestimated or underestimated peer substance with those who accurately estimated peer use. Other variables included in the analyses were the presence of close friends with alcohol or other drug problems and family history of substance use. RESULTS: Tobacco use by others was overestimated by 46.1% and accurately estimated by 37.3% of participants. Cannabis use by others was overestimated by 21.8% and accurately estimated by 31.6% of participants. Alcohol use by others was overestimated by more than half (53.4%) of participants and accurately estimated by 31.0%. In multivariable models, compared with participants who accurately estimated tobacco use by others, those who overestimated it reported smoking more cigarettes per week (incidence rate ratio [IRR] [95% CI], 1.17 [range, 1.05, 1.32]). There was no difference in the number of cigarettes smoked per week between those underestimating and those accurately estimating tobacco use by others (IRR [95% CI], 0.99 [range, 0.84, 1.17]). Compared with participants accurately estimating cannabis use by others, those who overestimated it reported more days of cannabis use per month (IRR [95% CI], 1.43 [range, 1.21, 1.70]), whereas those who underestimated it reported fewer days of cannabis use per month (IRR [95% CI], 0.62 [range, 0.23, 0.75]). Compared with participants accurately estimating alcohol use by others, those who overestimated it reported consuming more drinks per week (IRR [95% CI], 1.57 [range, 1.43, 1.72]), whereas those who underestimated it reported consuming fewer drinks per week (IRR [95% CI], 0.41 [range, 0.34, 0.50]). CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of substance use by others are associated with one's own use. In particular, overestimating use by others is frequent among young men and is associated with one's own greater consumption. This association is independent of the substance use environment, indicating that, even in the case of proximity to a heavy-usage group, perception of use by others may influence one's own use. If preventive interventions are to be based on normative feedback, and their aim is to reduce overestimations of use by others, then the prevalence of overestimation indicates that they may be of benefit to roughly half the population; or, in the case of cannabis, to as few as 20%. Such interventions should take into account differing strengths of association across substances.

Perception et communication du risque: du diabète à la maladie cardiovasculaire [Risk perception and communication: from diabetes to cardiovascular diseases].

Evidence-based medicine has enabled to approach disease in a more rational and scientific way. Clinical research has identified behaviours and risk factors that could cause disease often "silent" at the beginning, such as diabetes. Despite the clear impact of these evidences on public health, it seems that the individual risk perception level remains weak. To mention as well, the health professionals very often have a different views, which makes it difficult to communicate the risk with patients. In this article we describe the principles of risk perception, the diabetes related risk perception concerning cardiovascular complications, and suggest some practical strategies and tools which could improve risk communication in the everyday practice.