Search

Aim: To determine the effectiveness of brief reminiscence‐based psychosocial interventions in alleviating psychological distress in cancer patients. Background: Cancer patients suffer tremendous psycho‐spiritual pain, which affects their quality of life. Brief reminiscence‐based psychosocial interventions have demonstrated positive effects on the mental health of cancer patients; however, the efficacy of these interventions has been inconsistent. Design: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods: This review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 checklist provided by the EQUATOR network. The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Scopus databases were systematically searched from inception to 27 November 2022 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English. Results: Twenty studies involving 1744 cancer participants were included. The meta‐analysis showed statistically significant effects of brief reminiscence‐based psychosocial interventions on hope, anxiety and depression at post‐intervention. A separate analysis revealed that brief reminiscence‐based psychosocial interventions had a sustainable effect on hope, spiritual well‐being, anxiety and depression at 1 month after the intervention. However, no statistically significant effect on quality of life was found in our study either immediately after the intervention or at 1 month. Conclusions: Brief reminiscence‐based psychosocial interventions can significantly reduce anxiety and depressive symptoms and improve hope and spiritual well‐being in cancer patients. Relevance to Clinical Practice: This study further supports that brief reminiscence‐based psychosocial interventions should be incorporated into the routine care of cancer patients to address their psychosocial distress. Patient or Public Contribution: All authors of this article contributed to the study conception and design. All authors of the included studies provided original data for this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible Summary: What is known on the subject?: Mentalizing is the capacity to understand both one's own and other people's behaviour in terms of mental states, such as, for example, desires, feelings and beliefs.The mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals help to establish effective therapeutic relationships and, in turn, lead to better patient outcomes. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: The personal factors positively associated with the mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals are being female, greater work experience and having a more secure attachment style. Psychosocial factors are having personal experience with psychotherapy, burnout, and in the case of female students, being able to identify with the female psychotherapist role model during training. There is limited evidence that training programmes can improve mentalizing capacities.Although the mentalization field is gaining importance and research is expanding, the implications for mental health nursing have not been previously reviewed. Mental health nurses are underrepresented in research on the mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals. This is significant given that mental health nurses work closest to patients and thus are more often confronted with patients' behaviour compared to other health care professionals, and constitute a large part of the workforce in mental healthcare for patients with mental illness. What are the implications for practice?: Given the importance of mentalizing capacity of both the patient and the nurse for a constructive working relationship, it is important that mental health nurses are trained in the basic principles of mentalization. Mental health nurses should be able to recognize situations where patients' lack of ability to mentalize creates difficulties in the interaction. They should also be able to recognize their own difficulties with mentalizing and be sensitive to the communicative implications this may have. Introduction: Mentalizing capacities of clinicians help to build effective therapeutic relationships and lead to better patient outcomes. Few studies have focused on factors associated with clinicians' mentalizing capacities and the intervention strategies to improve them. Aim: Present a systematic review of empirical studies on factors associated with healthcare professionals' mentalizing capacities and the effectiveness of intervention programmes designed to improve these capacities. Method: Following PRISMA‐guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and CINAHL. Results: Out of a systematic search with 1537 hits, 22 studies were included. Personal factors positively associated with mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals are being female, greater work experience and having a more secure attachment style. Psychosocial factors are having personal experience with psychotherapy, burnout, and in the case of female students, being able to identify with the female psychotherapist role model during training. Evidence that training programmes improve mentalizing capacities is limited. Discussion: Mental health nurses are underrepresented in research on mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals and training programs to improve these capacities are practically absent. Implications for Practice: For mental health nurses, training in basic mentalizing theory and skills will improve their capacities in building effective working relationships with patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible Summary: What is known on the subject?: Young‐onset dementia (YOD) refers to a phenomenon in which dementia symptoms appear under age 65. Diagnosing YOD is difficult and its progression is fast. Furthermore, it limits the socio‐economic careers of people living with YOD, regardless of their needs.People living with YOD and their carers have unstable occupational status and their dependents also have to face a high burden of care. They claim that existing social support for dementia is limited to the elderly and is not suitable for them. What the paper adds to existing knowledge?: The characteristics of non‐pharmacological intervention studies for people living with YOD and/or their carers so far, and an analysis of the needs supported via the applied interventions.A theoretical basis and direction for the interventions to be studied in the future. What are the implications for practice?: Research and intervention development should focus more on the needs of people living with YOD. In addition, it is necessary to understand and reflect on carers who directly care for people living with YOD.A multidisciplinary programme that supports wide area of the needs should be developed. Introduction: Young‐onset dementia (YOD) is a highly influential disease that exerts force on the normal life of those who still have to continue social life. Research has been lacking in spite of its seriousness, which accounts for about 9% of all dementia cases. Aim: This study aimed to examine non‐pharmacological interventions for people living with YOD and/or their carers, and to analyse how those interventions support their needs. Method: A scoping review methodology was utilized to search the studies examining interventions for people living with YOD and/or their carers, and in English or Korean. The information was extracted, summarized and analysed in CANE categories. Results: Sixteen studies were included in the review. Five types of interventions were drawn. 'Memory' was the most covered part of the needs by the interventions. Discussion: This study found that interventions currently do not match the needs of people living with YOD and their carers. Multidisciplinary research would be eligible to cover the subjects' wide range of the needs as much as possible. Implications for Practice: We suggest the development of a specialized needs assessment tool and specialized interventions for people living with young‐onset dementia and their carers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Caregivers of children with chronic diseases suffer from great parenting pressure, which directly affects the treatment and rehabilitation of children, reduces the quality of life of caregivers and damages family functioning. Existing reviews have not systematically summarized and evaluated interventions for parenting stress in caregivers of children with chronic diseases. Data Sources: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, OVID, CNKI, CBM, Wan Fang and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible reviews in November 2021 and October 2022. Methods: Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full texts of articles for eligibility, and appraised the quality of reviews using JBI. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. Findings are reported in accordance with PRISMA checklist. Narrative summaries grouped findings by intervention types. Results: Out of 2632 records, we included 21 systematic reviews for a synthesis. Interventions for parenting stress in children with chronic diseases were divided into seven categories. Cognitive behavioural interventions, psychosocial interventions, child behavioural and/or developmental parent interventions and synthesized interventions have shown high‐level evidence in reducing parenting stress for caregivers of children with chronic diseases. Furthermore, outcome measures and intervention protocols were highly heterogeneous across interventions. Conclusions: This umbrella review suggest that reducing the parenting stress of caregivers of children with chronic diseases can directly target caregivers' parenting stress through cognitive behavioural interventions/psychosocial interventions and/or provide guidance to parents on the behavioural and developmental problems of children with chronic diseases. A more standardized approach to outcome measures is essential to assess efficacy and compare interventions across studies. Relevance to Clinical Practice: The findings provide information and evidence for reducing parenting stress among caregivers of children with chronic diseases to guide the development of comprehensive intervention strategies. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient or public contribution does not apply to this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This scoping review aims to describe published work on the symptoms and management of long COVID conditions. Background: Symptoms and management of COVID‐19 have focused on the acute stage. However, long‐term consequences have also been observed. Methods: A scoping review was performed based on the framework suggested by Arksey and O'Malley. We conducted a literature search to retrieve articles published from May 2020 to March 2021 in CINHAL, Cochrane library, Embase, PubMed and Web of science, including backward and forward citation tracking from the included articles. Among the 1880 articles retrieved, 34 articles met our criteria for review: 21 were related to symptom presentation and 13 to the management of long COVID. Results: Long COVID symptoms were described in 21 articles. Following COVID‐19 treatment, hospitalised patients most frequently reported dyspnoea, followed by anosmia/ageusia, fatigue and cough, while non‐hospitalised patients commonly reported cough, followed by fever and myalgia/arthralgia. Thirteen studies described management for long COVID: Focused on a multidisciplinary approach in seven articles, pulmonary rehabilitation in three articles, fatigue management in two articles and psychological therapy in one study. Conclusion: People experience varied COVID‐19 symptoms after treatment. However, guidelines on evidence‐based, multidisciplinary management for long COVID conditions are limited in the literature. The COVID‐19 pandemic may extend due to virus mutations; therefore, it is crucial to develop and disseminate evidence‐based, multidisciplinary management guidelines. Relevance to clinical practice: A rehabilitation care plan and community healthcare plans are necessary for COVID‐19 patients before discharge. Remote programmes could facilitate the monitoring and screening of people with long COVID. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]