Educational intervention for parents of adolescents with chronic illness: a pre-post test pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: This pilot experimental study tested the feasibility and intended effect of an educational intervention for parents to help them assist their adolescent child with chronic illness (CI) in becoming autonomous. METHODS: A two-phase pre-post pilot intervention study targeting parents of adolescents with CI was conducted. Parents were allocated to group 1 and 2 and received the four-module intervention consecutively. Intended effect was measured through online questionnaires for parents and adolescents before, at 2 months after, and at 4-6 months after the intervention. Feasibility was assessed through an evaluation questionnaire for parents. RESULTS: The most useful considered modules concerned the future of the adolescent and parents and social life. The most valued aspect was to exchange with other parents going through similar problems and receiving a new outlook on their relationship with their child. For parents, improvement trends appeared for shared management, parent protection, and self-efficacy, and worsening trends appeared for coping skills, parental perception of child vulnerability, and parental stress. For adolescents, improvement trends appeared for self-efficacy and parental bonding and worsening trends appeared for shared management and coping skills. CONCLUSION: Parents could benefit from peer-to-peer support and education as they support the needed autonomy development of their child. Future studies should test an online platform for parents to find peer support at all times and places.

Cardiovascular disease and the changing face of global public health : a focus on low and middle income countries

Eighty percent of the global 17 million deaths due to cardiovascular disease (CVD) occur in low and middle income countries (LMICs). The burden of CVD and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) is expected to markedly increase because of the global aging of the population and increasing exposure to detrimental lifestyle-related risk in LMICs. Interventions to reduce four main risks related to modifiable behaviors (tobacco use, unhealthy diet, low physical activity and excess alcohol consumption) are key elements for effective primary prevention of the four main NCDs (CVD, cancer, diabetes and chronic pulmonary disease). These behaviors are best improved through structural interventions (e.g., clean air policy, taxes on cigarettes, new recipes for processed foods with reduced salt and fat, urban shaping to improve mobility, etc.). In addition, health systems in LMICs should be reoriented to deliver integrated cost-effective treatment to persons at high risk at the primary health care level. The full implementation of a small number of highly cost effective, affordable and scalable interventions ("best buys") is likely to be the necessary and sufficient ingredient for curbing NCDs in LMICs. NCDs are both a cause and a consequence of poverty. It is therefore important to frame NCD prevention and control within the broader context of social determinants and development agenda. The recent emphasis on NCDs at a number of health and economic forums (including the September 2011 High Level Meeting on NCDs at the United Nations) provides a new opportunity to move the NCD agenda forward in LMICs.

Social justice in education : how the function of selection in educational institutions predicts support for (non)egalitarian assessment practices

Educational institutions are considered a keystone for the establishment of a meritocratic society. They supposedly serve two functions: an educational function that promotes learning for all, and a selection function that sorts individuals into different programs, and ultimately social positions, based on individual merit. We study how the function of selection relates to support for assessment practices known to harm vs. benefit lower status students, through the perceived justice principles underlying these practices. We study two assessment practices: normative assessment-focused on ranking and social comparison, known to hinder the success of lower status students-and formative assessment-focused on learning and improvement, known to benefit lower status students. Normative assessment is usually perceived as relying on an equity principle, with rewards being allocated based on merit and should thus appear as positively associated with the function of selection. Formative assessment is usually perceived as relying on corrective justice that aims to ensure equality of outcomes by considering students' needs, which makes it less suitable for the function of selection. A questionnaire measuring these constructs was administered to university students. Results showed that believing that education is intended to select the best students positively predicts support for normative assessment, through increased perception of its reliance on equity, and negatively predicts support for formative assessment, through reduced perception of its ability to establish corrective justice. This study suggests that the belief in the function of selection as inherent to educational institutions can contribute to the reproduction of social inequalities by preventing change from assessment practices known to disadvantage lowerstatus student, namely normative assessment, to more favorable practices, namely formative assessment, and by promoting matching beliefs in justice principles.

Multimorbidity in primary care : protocol of a national cross-sectional study in Switzerland.

INTRODUCTION: With the ageing of the population and the general improvement of care, an increasing number of people are living with multiple chronic health conditions or 'multimorbidity'. Multimorbidity often implies multiple medical treatments. As a consequence, the risk of adverse events and the time spent by patients for their treatments increase exponentially. In many cases, treatment guidelines traditionally defined for single conditions are not easily applicable. Primary care for individuals with multimorbidity requires complex patient-centred care and good communication between the patient and the general practitioner (GP). This often includes prioritising among the different chronic conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The main objectives of this study are to describe the burden related to multimorbidity (disease-related burden and burden of treatment) in primary care and to identify the factors influencing it. Other objectives include evaluating patients' perception of treatment burden and quality of life, assessing factors influencing that perception, and investigating prioritisation in the management of multimorbidity from the perspectives of GPs and patients. For this cross-sectional study, patient enrolment will take place in GP's private practices across Switzerland. A convenient sample of 100 GPs will participate; overall, 1000 patients with at least three chronic health conditions will be enrolled. Data will be collected as paper-based questionnaires for GPs and delayed telephone interview questionnaires for patients. GPs will provide demographic and practice-related data. In addition, each GP will complete a paper-based questionnaire for each patient that they enrol. Each patient will complete a telephone interview questionnaire. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the research ethics committee of Canton Vaud, Switzerland (Protocol 315/14). The results of the study will be reported in international peer-reviewed journals.

Moral disengagement: Towards a context-general category-based measure of the concept

Bandura (1986) developed the concept of moral disengagement to explain how individuals can engage in detrimental behavior while experiencing low levels of negative feelings such as guilt-feelings. Most of the research conducted on moral disengagement investigated this concept as a global concept (e.g., Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996; Moore, Detert, Klebe Treviño, Baker, & Mayer, 2012) while Bandura (1986, 1990) initially developed eight distinct mechanisms of moral disengagement grouped into four categories representing the various means through which moral disengagement can operate. In our work, we propose to develop measures of this concept based on its categories, namely rightness of actions, rejection of personal responsibility, distortion of negative consequences, and negative perception of the victims, and which is not specific a particular area of research. Through our measures, we aim at better understanding the cognitive process leading individuals to behave unethically by investigating which category plays a role in explaining unethical behavior depending on the situations in which individuals are. To this purpose, we conducted five studies to develop the measures and to test its predictive validity. Particularly, we assessed the ability of the newly developed measures to predict two types of unethical behaviors, i.e. discriminatory behavior and cheating behavior. Confirmatory Factor analyses demonstrated a good fit of the model and findings generally supported our predictions.

The difference of disease perception by juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients and their parents : analysis of the JAMAR questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: The JAMAR (Juvenile Arthritis Multidimensional Assessment Report) has been developed to evaluate the perception of the patient and his parents on different items: well-being, pain, functional status, quality of life, disease activity, disease course, side effects of medication, therapeutic compliance and satisfaction with illness outcome. Our aim was to compare disease's perception by JIA patients and their parents. METHODS: We included into the study 100 consecutive patients over 7 years of age. We asked both parent and child to complete the JAMAR questionnaire. For each patient we recorded demographic and disease related data. We examined the level of disagreement between children and parents for the quantitative items of the JAMAR: VAS Pain, VAS Disease Activity, VAS Well Being, Juvenile Arthritis Functional Score, HRQoL. Then we looked for a relation between discordance-rate and demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: Children and parents' median scores for all five items were similar. Individual dyads agreement was low, with a large amount of pairs (80) discordant for at least one item. We found higher MD VAS and JADAS in more discordant dyads, suggesting that when the disease is more active discordance between child and parent increase. CONCLUSION: The JAMAR questionnaire is an important tool that helps clinicians to detect divergent child and parent's disease perceptions. It is essential that both patients and parents fill the JAMAR questionnaire for a complete clinical and psychosocial evaluation.