Choose (and use) your tools wisely: "Validated" measures and advanced analyses can provide invalid evidence for/against a theory

Common Sense Models of Obesity: a Qualitative Investigation of Illness Representations

BACKGROUND

The Common Sense Model provides a framework to understand health beliefs and behaviors. It includes illness representations comprised of five domains (identity, cause, consequences, timeline, and control/cure). While widely used, it is rarely applied to obesity, yet could explain self-management decisions and inform treatments. This study answered the question, what are patients' illness representations of obesity?; and examined the Common Sense Model's utility in the context of obesity.

METHODS

Twenty-four participants with obesity completed semi-structured phone interviews (12 women, 12 men). Directed content analysis of transcripts/notes was used to understand obesity illness representations across the five illness domains. Potential differences by gender and race/ethnicity were assessed.

RESULTS

Participants did not use clinical terms to discuss weight. Participants' experiences across domains were interconnected. Most described interacting life systems as causing weight problems and used negative consequences of obesity to identify it as a health threat. The control/cure of obesity was discussed within every domain. Participants focused on health and appearance consequences (the former most salient to older, the latter most salient to younger adults). Weight-related timelines were generally chronic. Women more often described negative illness representations and episodic causes (e.g., pregnancy). No patterns were identified by race/ethnicity.

CONCLUSIONS

The Common Sense Model is useful in the context of obesity. Obesity illness representations highlighted complex causes and consequences of obesity and its management. To improve weight-related care, researchers and clinicians should focus on these beliefs in relation to preferred labels for obesity, obesity's most salient consequences, and ways of monitoring change.

Psychosocial research in the diabetic foot: Are we making progress?

BACKGROUND/METHODS

This review summarizes recent advances regarding the role of psychological factors in people with a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). It describes the detrimental effects of diabeticfoot complications and in particular, Charcot Neuroarthropathy (CN), on health status and quality of life (QoL) and emphasizes the importance of utilizing DFU-specific assessment tools.

RESULTS

Diabetic neuropathy (DN)-related postural instability is key in generating depression in high DFU risk patients and in predicting offloading non-adherence those with active DFUs. Patients' views of their own DFU risk are largely inconsistent with biomedical models, resulting in a lack of preventive foot self-care. Furthermore, DFUs are a source of specific emotional responses, with fear of amputation predominant. While fear of amputation is associated with better preventive foot self-care, it appears to be linked to DFU non-healing, though mechanisms are yet to be elucidated. Until now, systemically released stress hormones were recognized as the only biological mechanism through which psychological stress influences healing. Recently, the skin has been found to be an extra-adrenal site for glucocorticoid synthesis with local, tissue-specific cortisol implicated in DFU non-healing.

CONCLUSIONS

These observations could potentially lead to future targets for therapeutic and psychological interventions.

Are Common Sense Model constructs and self-efficacy simultaneously correlated with self-management behaviors and health outcomes: A systematic review

This systematic review answered two questions among adults with chronic conditions: When included in the same statistical model, are Common Sense Model constructs and self-efficacy both associated with (1) self-management behaviors and (2) health outcomes? We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and included 29 articles. When included in the same statistical model, Common Sense Model constructs and self-efficacy were both correlated with outcomes. Self-efficacy was more consistently associated with self-management behaviors, and Common Sense Model constructs were more consistently associated with health outcomes. Findings support the continued inclusion and integration of both frameworks to understand and/or improve chronic illness self-management and outcomes.

Automatic processes and self-regulation of illness

Research on the Commonsense Self-Regulation Model has emphasised reflective/conscious perceptual processes regarding illness threat (beliefs about symptoms, consequences, timeline, and curability) in predicting and changing coping behaviours. Understanding of illness self-regulation and avenues for intervention might be enriched by consideration of automatic processes that influence the recognition and identification of illness, response to illness, and ongoing management. This article adopts an integrative approach to (1) outline the theoretical importance of implicit processes in patients' self-regulation of illness and methods to study them; (2) review research evidence for these processes, including interventions tested to modify them; and (3) outline avenues for future research. A substantial body of research on implicit processes (cognitive bias and interpretational bias) in illness maintenance in chronic illness has recently been extended to detection and interpretation of acute illness and new perspectives relating to the self-system. There is encouraging evidence that cognitive accessibility of coping and implicit attitudes may impact upon coping behaviours. Procedures that strategically automatise coping responses and create habits have considerable promise. We outline an agenda for future research in which health psychology accepts the challenge posed by the interplay of the reflective and associative systems in promoting effective self-regulation of illness.

Brief intervention for stress management and change in illness perception among hypertensive and normotensive workers: pilot study and protocol

The objective of this study was to describe and evaluate the effects of a pilot intervention on perceived stress, knowledge about hypertension, and illness perception among hypertensive and normotensive workers. The intervention consisted of two group sessions performed in the workplace aiming to reduce stress, increase knowledge about hypertension, and explore the effect on illness perception. The sessions included clinical aspects of systemic arterial hypertension, illness perception and health behavior, and strategies for stress management. Workers from a petrochemical industry (19 hypertensive and 14 normotensive) participated in the study by answering a biosociodemographic questionnaire, the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, the Perceived Stress Scale, and a quiz with questions about hypertension. The measurements were collected at an initial meeting to gather the participants and 90 days after the intervention. There was a significant reduction in the perceived stress levels of both groups, in addition to an increase in the perception of personal control and illness coherence. Normotensive workers also increased their knowledge about hypertension, while hypertensive patients increased the perception that treatment could control the illness. In conclusion, the pilot intervention generated positive effects and can be considered a strategy of illness prevention for normotensive workers and control for hypertensive patients.