Giving Meaning to Non-Communicable Illness: Mixed-Method Research on Sense of Grip on Disease (SoGoD)
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Non-Communicable Disease and Primary Care
1.2. From Sense to Meaning: The Sense of Grip on Disease (SoGoD)
- Organization of Temporality. This refers to the temporal articulation of disease experience [48,49,50,51]. Through this function, it is possible to frame the disease in the time of a person’s existence [52,53,54], and to recognize turning points and differences between the time before and after the diagnosis.
- Integration of disease. This refers to the process of construction of a subjective theory through which patients give meaning to the experience of disease, consistent with personal values, norms and aims [37,55]. From her own subjective theory, a person can integrate the disease into her story in different ways [10].
- Orientation to action. This refers to narrative agency, namely the process by which people actively recognize their role in the process of management of their chronic condition [50].
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Aims and Design
- Explore, through an adaptation of the Narrative Semi-Structured Interview on Sense on Grip on Disease [60] the principal dimensions of Sense of Grip on Disease in people affected by different non-communicable diseases;
- Identify different Grip Profiles, representative of different ways to adjust to disease and integrate it into one’s own experience;
- Study the association between the Grip Profiles and both the quality of healthcare assistance and patient engagement.
2.2. Participants
- Aged between 34 and 75 years old (this range includes adults, late adults and young elderly);
- Having one or more chronic conditions included in the four main groups of non-communicable diseases [1]: cardiovascular illness, cancer, diabetes and chronic respiratory disorders.
2.3. Instruments
2.3.1. Narrative Semi-Structured Interview on Sense on Grip on Disease
- Organize illness experience with respect to past, present and future (organization of temporality);
- Come to terms with illness and integrate it into their horizon of values, representations and aims (integration of disease);
- Express the emotions and feelings related to illness (expression of emotions);
- Talk about their disease experience and share it with relatives, friends, colleagues and/or healthcare workers (social sharing);
- Come to terms with the daily management of their own condition, for example taking pills, doing exercise and making decisions of activities on their own initiatives, etc., (orientation to action).
2.3.2. Patient Health Engagement-Scale
2.3.3. Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-20)
2.3.4. SF-12 Health Survey
2.4. Procedure
2.5. Methods of Analysis of Narrative Corpus
2.5.1. Qualitative Analysis of Narratives
2.5.2. Quantitative Analysis of Narratives
2.6. Statistical Analysis for Association between Clusters and Psychological Variables
3. Results
3.1. The Declination of Narrative Sensemaking Modalities
- Organization of temporality
- Absence: 5 (16.13%). This modality refers to a temporal framework in which there is no difference between the time before and after the onset of the disease. This is typical of the narratives in which the disease is represented as irrelevant to the patients’ life stories: it is not considered a turning point, so it has not the power to mark the time of one self’s existence.«Nothing has changed, really nothing. It’s everything like before»
- Crystallization: 12 (38.71%). This modality refers to narratives in which the time appears to be blocked and is not allowed to flow. Specifically, the temporal framework is frozen at the time of diagnosis, or it is crystalized in an eternal and precarious present marked by the necessities connected to disease management. This modality is typical of narratives in which there are many chronological references to the time of medications and/or medical checks: the time of life totally coincides with the time of illness.«I can’t make long-term plans, because my life is punctuated by periodic and obligatory medical checks every 6 or 12 months. I have to deal with the unpredictability of disease, I don’t know what… Anyway, I live, I try not to think about it, but I still live in a precarious situation, I am unable to plan my existence as I did before»
- Transformation: 14 (45.16%). This modality refers to a temporal framework that evolves following the evolving flow of experience. It is typical of the narratives in which it is marked a difference between the time before and after the onset of the illness, or in which the experience of the illness itself seems to evolve during the time.«The more the years go by, the more I feel calm, because it means that you can manage it, you can control it, obviously with medications. All in all, the more time has passed, the more reassured I am»
- Integration of disease
- Conflict: 2 (6.45%). This modality refers to a struggle between the self and the disease. It is typical of the narratives that express a difficulty to elaborate on the diagnosis, understand the illness and integrate it into one’s story. The illness has been represented as an enemy or a part of life that is impossible to accept because it has destroyed the previous versions of the self and of the world.«There is no remedy, here, there is no remedy, it cannot be, it is not something that can be solved... and then this is it, it is anger, anger every day, every day is anger, more than anything else it is anger... I’m angry with the disease, that’s it, that’s it»
- Tolerance: 17 (54.84%). This modality refers to an acceptance of the illness characterized by the lack of a subjective meaning for the experience. It is typical of narratives in which the disease is represented as something that happens for no particular reason and that has to be accepted without asking what it could mean for oneself.«The problem is there, it is there, it has come and we keep it. We can do very little, it would have been better if he hadn’t come, but he did»
- Coexistence: 12 (38.71%). This modality refers to a full integration of the disease into one’s own life story. It is typical of the narratives in which the disease has been represented as a part of oneself, although not the most relevant part. The narrative expresses a good elaboration of the diagnosis and the ability to understand the changes imposed by the pathology and the negative sides of it, without feeling overwhelmed by them.«I mean, actually for me it’s a stress, but it’s a stress I’ve lived all my life, it’s a stress… I mean, for sure it isn’t totally positive, but I live it as... I see my life as a crossword puzzle, do you know the crossword puzzle? In the cross puzzle there are words that have to fit together, so I see all the problems we have as a challenge to find the solution»
- Expression of emotions
- Vagueness (17 (54.84%). This modality considers the affective sphere (moods, affects, emotions and feelings) as little differentiated, confused and often totalizing. This way shows a lack of contextualization, and a difficulty in expressing more detailed information about the emotional features of one’s own experience (e.g., “I feel bad” without explaining why or when). Throughout the narrative, we find expressive poverty from an emotional point of view and a very small range of emotions.«It’s anger, anger…… most of all it’s anger. I’m angry with disease… everyday it’s anger»
- Differentiation: 22 (45.16%). This modality refers to the expression of affects, feelings and emotions related to the illness, often linked to specific episodes or situations. The patient is able to consider different emotional nuances and is capable of having and using a wider vocabulary of possible descriptions for affective states, emotions related to different circumstances, and different feelings that bind them to other people.«I am worried, but in some moments, I am also serene. I mean, on the one hand, I’m worried, but I don’t feel it as a burden [...] I’m worried about the disease, not because I have to go back to chemo or I may have a relapse, but because I’m afraid of feeling really bad. But even if I am worried, I always remain optimistic, I did not despair, I always thought that I would come out of it, even with difficulty»
- Orientation to action
- Executive: 22 (70.97%). This modality refers to a rigid, schematic and non-personalized management of the disease. The agency is often delegated to someone else, typically to physicians and/or family members, sometimes with a feeling of being trapped by the obligations associated with the disease (e.g., Taking pills or following a diet).«My wife tries to control me, to help me, sometimes I get angry because she controls me on food choices, if she were not here with me, I would already be dead»
- Flexible: 9 (29.03%). This modality refers to the assumption of responsibility and to the competence of decision-making related to illness management. It is typical of narratives that express different ways of illness management related to different situations: the therapeutic adherence is contextualized, and the patient is personally engaged in the management of her condition.«I do things more in the morning than in the afternoon, because I feel very tired in the afternoon. For example, if I wanted to clean the house in the afternoon, I couldn’t, so in the morning I get up at 7 and I do it, while in the afternoon I begin to get tired and then at 21:30 I go to bed, otherwise I can’t do anything»
- Limiting: 0 (0%). This modality refers to the limitation of one’s daily activities out of fear of the disease and/or its consequences.
- Social sharing
- Loneliness: 10 (32.26%). This modality refers to the absence of social sharing of difficulties, emotions and thoughts about the illness. It is typical of narratives in which people say that the disease is not a subject of conversation with friends, family or practitioners, or of narratives in which appears a difficulty in sharing with others the new identity of the ill person.«I don’t talk about it with anyone… no…no…anyone, absolutely anyone»
- Interchange: 16 (51.61%). This modality refers to the use of social conversation for asking or communicating information about the disease. It is typical of narratives in which others are represented as able to provide concrete support, but their presence or absence is not so relevant in terms of emotional relief or feelings of being understood.«Talking about it doesn’t change things so much… of course I feel supported if, for example, I have to do a checkup and my son come with me, but then it doesn’t change me very much if for one reason or another he’s not there»
- Sharing: 5 (16.13%). This modality refers to the use of social conversation for sharing emotions, feelings and points of view about the disease. It is typical of narratives in which the narrator shares with others the meaning he has attributed to illness and in which others are represented as significant for the emotional support they provide and for the ability to understand the narrator’s needs.«Sometimes I talk about it with friends, as I told you I am a head teacher, and I also talk about it with some more sensitive teachers who understand, perceive the diversity of my gaze [...] it makes me feel good talking about it, of course, above all when I feel listened to. »
3.2. Results Multiple Correspondence Analysis
- B_3 (integration–coexistence)
- A_3 (organization of temporality–transformation)
- D_2 (orientation to action-flexible)
- B_2 (integration–tolerance)
- C_2 (expression of emotions-vagueness)
- C_1 (expression of emotions–differentiation)
- E_2 (social sharing–interchange)
- E_3 (social sharing–sharing)
3.3. Results of Cluster Analysis
- A_3 (organization of temporality–transformation)
- B_3 (integration-coexistence)
- D_2 (orientation to action-flexible)
- D_1 (orientation to action-executive)
- B_2 (integration-tolerance)
- A_2 (organization of temporality-crystallization).
- A_2 (organization of temporality-crystallization)
- B_2 (integration-tolerance)
- D_1 (orientation to action-executive)
- D_2 (orientation to action-flexible),
- B_3 (integration-coexistence)
- A_3 (organization of temporality-transformation)
3.4. Results of Statystical Analysis for Association between Clusters and Psychological Variables
4. Discussion
4.1. The Articulation of Narrative Functions
4.2. The Main Dimensions of Sense of Grip
4.3. The Grip Profiles
4.4. Grid Profiles and Involvement of Patient
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
- When have you discovered your medical problems for the first time?
- Do you remember what did you feel and what did you think when you received the diagnosis?
- Could you please tell me two words that describe how do you live your illness’ experience?
- You told me [first word said by interviewed], could you please tell me a specific episode that could help me to understand what do you mean when you say [first word said by interviewed]?
- You told me [second word said by interviewed], could you please tell me a specific episode that could help me to understand what do you mean when you say [second word said by interviewed]?
- How do you think your disease controls or affects your life?
- How do you usually manage your medical condition in everyday life?
- If you think about your experience, how do your symptoms vary? Do you think these variations in symptoms are linked to something?
- Are you taking drug therapy? If yes, how is your relationship with medicines?
- Do you think that there is someone or something particularly useful for the daily management of your disease?
- Do you usually talk about your disease with someone? How do you talk about it and how does it feel when you talk about it?
- Has your way of thinking about the disease changed over time?
- How do you think that COVID-19 pandemic has affected your illness’ experience?
- What do you bring with you from your illness’ experience?
References
- Word Health Organization. Noncommunicable Diseases Global Monitoring Framework: Indicator Definitions and Specifications. Available online: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/inaugural-who-partners-forum/gmf_indicator_definitions_version_nov2014438a791b-16d3-46f3-a398-88dee12e796b.pdf?sfvrsn=4b337764_1&download=true (accessed on 3 April 2022).
- Harris, R.E. Epidemiology of Chronic Disease: Global Perspectives; Jones & Bartlett Learning: Burlington, MA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- McGrady, A.; Moss, D. Integrative Pathways: Navigating Chronic Illness with a Mind-Body-Spirit Approach; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Chang, A.Y.; Skirbekk, V.F.; Tyrovolas, S.; Kassebaum, N.J.; Dieleman, J.L. Measuring population ageing: An analysis of the global burden of disease study 2017. Lancet Public Health 2019, 4, 157–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Graffigna, G.; Barello, S. Engagement: Un Nuovo Modello di Partecipazione in Sanità; Il Pensiero Scientifico: Roma, Italy, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Beaglehole, R.; Bonita, R.; Horton, R.; Adams, C.; Alleyne, G.; Asaria, P.; Baugh, V.; Bekedam, H.; Billo, N.; Casswell, S.; et al. Priority actions for the non-communicable disease crisis. Lancet 2011, 377, 1438–1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, J.E.; Stevens, G.A.; Mathers, C.D.; Bonita, R.; Rehm, J.; Kruk, M.E.; Riley, L.M.; Dain, K.; Kengne, A.P.; Chalkidou, K.; et al. NCD Countdown 2030: Worldwide trends in non-communicable disease mortality and progress towards Sustainable Development goal target 3.4. Lancet 2018, 392, 1072–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Aujoulat, I.; D’Hoore, W.; Deccache, A. Patient empowerment in theory and practice: Polysemy or Cacophony? Patient Educ. Couns. 2007, 66, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aujoulat, I.; Marcolongo, R.; Bonadiman, L.; Deccache, A. Reconsidering patient empowerment in chronic illness: A Critique of models of self-efficacy and bodily control. Soc. Sci. Med. 2008, 66, 1228–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asbring, P. Chronic illness—A disruption in life: Identity-transformation among women with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia. J. Adv. Nurs. 2001, 34, 312–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Engle, G.L. The clinical application of the biopsychosocial model. Am. J. Psych. 1980, 137, 535–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barello, S.; Graffigna, G.; Vegni, E. Patient engagement as an emerging challenge for healthcare services: Mapping the literature. Nurs. Res. Pract. 2012, 2012, 905934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Salmon, P.; Hall, G.M. Patient empowerment or the Emperor’s New Clothes. J. R. Soc. Med. 2004, 97, 53–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCorkle, R.; Ercolano, E.; Lazenby, M.; Schulman-Green, D.; Schilling, L.S.; Lorig, K.; Wagner, E.H. Self-management: Enabling and empowering patients living with cancer as a chronic illness. CA A Cancer J. Clin. 2011, 61, 50–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, T.-C.; Lin, H.-S.; Chen, C.-M. Association between chronic disease self-management, health status, and quality of life in older Taiwanese adults with chronic illnesses. Healthcare 2022, 10, 609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lin, P.-Y.; Lee, T.-Y.; Liu, C.-Y.; Lee, Y.-J. The effect of self-efficacy in self-management on diabetes distress in young people with type 2 diabetes. Healthcare 2021, 9, 1736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nolte, E.; Knai, C.; Saltman, R. Assessing Chronic Disease Management in European Health Systems. Concepts and Approaches; Technical Report; World Health Organization: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bodenheimer, T. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2002, 288, 1775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zalai, D.; Szeifert, L.; Novak, M. Psychological distress and depression in patients with chronic kidney disease. Semin. Dial. 2012, 25, 428–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sutin, A.R.; Zonderman, A.B.; Ferrucci, L.; Terracciano, A. Personality traits and chronic disease: Implications for adult personality development. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2013, 68, 912–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gross, J.J.; John, O.P. Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2003, 85, 348–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hu, T.; Zhang, D.; Wang, J.; Mistry, R.; Ran, G.; Wang, X. Relation between emotion regulation and mental health: A meta-analysis review. Psychol. Rep. 2014, 114, 341–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lida, H.; Fujimoto, S.; Wakita, T.; Yanagi, M.; Suzuki, T.; Koitabashi, K.; Yazawa, M.; Kawarazaki, H.; Ishibashi, Y.; Shibagaki, Y.; et al. Psychological flexibility and depression in advanced CKD and dialysis. Kidney Med. 2020, 2, 684–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bąk-Sosnowska, M.; Gruszczyńska, M.; Wyszomirska, J.; Daniel-Sielańczyk, A. The influence of selected psychological factors on medication adherence in patients with chronic diseases. Healthcare 2022, 10, 426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, C.; Lau, H.P.B.; Chan, M.P.S. Coping flexibility and psychological adjustment to stressful life changes: A meta-analytic review. Psychol. Bull. 2014, 140, 1582–1607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yao, T.; Zheng, Q.; Fan, X. The impact of online social support on patients’ quality of life and the moderating role of Social Exclusion. J. Serv. Res. 2015, 18, 369–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, C.L. Making sense of the meaning literature: An integrative review of meaning making and its effects on adjustment to stressful life events. Psychol. Bull. 2010, 136, 257–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Luca Picione, R.; Freda, M.F. Borders and modal articulations. Semiotic constructs of sensemaking processes enabling a fecund dialogue between cultural psychology and clinical psychology. Integr. Psychol. Behav. Sci. 2016, 50, 29–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Salvatore, S.; Freda, M.F. Affect, unconscious and sensemaking. A psychodynamic, semiotic and Dialogic Model. New Ideas Psychol. 2011, 29, 119–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valsiner, J. Culture in Minds and Societies: Foundations of Cultural Psychology; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Janoff-Bulman, R. Posttraumatic growth: Three explanatory models. Psychol. Inq. 2004, 15, 30–34. [Google Scholar]
- Joseph, S.; Linley, P.A. Positive adjustment to threatening events: An organismic valuing theory of growth through adversity. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2005, 9, 262–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horowitz, M.J. Stress-Response Syndromes. In International Handbook of Traumatic Stress Syndromes; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1993; Volume 49–60. [Google Scholar]
- Proulx, T.; Inzlicht, M. The five “a”s of meaning maintenance: Finding meaning in the theories of sense-making. Psychol. Inq. 2012, 23, 317–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martino, M.L.; Onorato, R.; Freda, M.F. Linguistic markers of processing trauma experience in women’s written narratives during different breast cancer phases: Implications for clinical interventions. Eur. J. Psychol. 2015, 11, 651–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Luca Picione, R.; Lozzi, U. Uncertainty as a constitutive condition of human experience: Paradoxes and complexity of sensemaking in the face of the crisis and uncertainty. Int. J. Psychoanal. Educ. Subj. Action Soc. 2021, 1, 14–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bruner, J.S. Acts of Meaning: Four Lectures on Mind and Culture; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Bruner, J. Life as Narrative. In Social Research: An International Quarterly; The Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2004; Volume 71, pp. 691–710. [Google Scholar]
- Charon, R. Narrative Medicine: Honoring the Stories of Illness; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Garro, L.C. Narrative representations of chronic illness experience: Cultural models of illness, mind, and body in stories concerning the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). Soc. Sci. Amp Med. 1994, 38, 775–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hydén, L.-C. Illness and narrative. Sociol. Health Illn. 2008, 19, 48–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kleinman, A. Local worlds of suffering: An interpersonal focus for ethnographies of illness experience. Qual. Health Res. 1992, 2, 127–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sools, A.M.; Murray, M.; Westerhof, G.J. Narrative health psychology: Once more unto the breach. J. Health Psychol. 2015, 20, 239–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freda, M.F.; Savarese, L.; Dolce, P.; Picione, R.D. Caregivers’ sensemaking of children’s hereditary angioedema: A semiotic narrative analysis of the sense of grip on the disease. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maiello, A.; Savarese, L.; De Luca Picione, R.; Auriemma, E.; Pacella, D.; Bova, M.; Cancian, M.; Zanichelli, A.; Spadaro, G.; Freda, M.F. Il Senso di Padronanza della Malattia Cronica: Una ricerca mixed Method con adulti affetti da Angioedema Ereditario. Psicol. Della Salut. 2022, in press. [Google Scholar]
- Savarese, L.; Freda, M.F.; De Luca Picione, R.; Dolce, P.; De Falco, R.; Alessio, M.; Cancian, M.; Franzese, A.; Guarino, M.D.; Perricone, R.; et al. The experience of living with a chronic disease in pediatrics from the mothers’ narratives: The clinical interview on parental sense of grip on the disease. Health Psychol. Open 2020, 7, 205510292097149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Luca Picione, R.; Freda, M.F.; Savarese, L. The Construction of the Sense of Grip on Chronic Disease. Clinical and Ethical Implications from Health Psychology Perspectives. In Foundation of Ethics-Based Practices; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 115–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brockmeier, J. Autobiographical time. Narrat. Inq. 2000, 10, 51–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Luca Picione, R.; Freda, M.F. Senso e significato. Riv. Psicol. Clin. 2012, 2, 17–26. [Google Scholar]
- De Luca Picione, R.; Martino, M.L.; Freda, M.F. Modal articulation: The psychological and 11 semiotic functions of modalities in the sensemaking process. Theory Psychol. 2018, 28, 84–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savarese, L.; Bova, M.; De Falco, R.; Guarino, M.D.; Siani, G.; Valerio, P.; Freda, M.F. The Role of the Meaning-Making Process in the Management of Hereditary Angioedema. In HealthCare and Culture: Subjectivity in Medical Context; Freda, M.F., De Luca Picione, R., Eds.; Information Age Publisher: Charlotte, NC, USA, 2017; pp. 59–77. [Google Scholar]
- Crossley, M.L. Narrative psychology, trauma and the study of self/identity. Theory Psychol. 2000, 10, 527–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jowsey, T. Time and Chronic Illness: A Narrative Review. Qual. Life Res. 2015, 25, 1093–1102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Williams, S. Chronic illness as biographical disruption or biographical disruption as chronic illness? Reflections on a core concept. Sociol. Health Illn. 2000, 22, 40–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thornton, T. Narrative rather than idiographic approaches as counterpart to the nomothetic approach to assessment. Psychopathology 2010, 43, 252–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Luca Picione, R.; Valsiner, J. Psychological functions of semiotic borders in sense-making: Liminality of narrative processes. Eur. J. Psychol. 2017, 13, 532–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tronick, E.; Beeghly, M. Infants’ meaning-making and the development of mental health problems. Am. Psychol. 2011, 66, 107–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life; Doubleday: New York, NY, USA, 1959. [Google Scholar]
- Salvatore, S. Psychology in Black and White: The Project of a Theory-Driven Science; Information Age Publishing Inc.: Charlotte, NC, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Savarese, L. La Narrazione Come Dispositivo Normativo e Regolativo Dell’esperienza di Malattia. Una Ricerca Narrativa sul Senso di Padronanza Genitoriale della Malattia Cronica (SdiP-M(G)) e la Validazione di un’Intervista Ad Hoc. Ph.D. Thesis, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Napoly, Italy, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Graffigna, G.; Barello, S.; Bonanomi, A.; Lozza, E. Measuring patient engagement: Development and psychometric properties of the Patient Health Engagement (PHE) scale. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schmittdiel, J.; Mosen, D.M.; Glasgow, R.E.; Hibbard, J.; Remmers, C.; Bellows, J. Patient assessment of chronic illness care (PACIC) and improved patient-centered outcomes for chronic conditions. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2007, 23, 77–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kodraliu, G.; Mosconi, P.; Groth, N.; Carmosino, G.; Perilli, A.; Gianicolo, E.A.; Rossi, C.; Apolone, G. Subjective health status assessment: Evaluation of the Italian version of the SF-12 Health Survey. Results from the MiOS Project. J. Epidemiol. Biostat. 2001, 6, 305–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gandek, B.; Ware, J.E.; Aaronson, N.K.; Apolone, G.; Bjorner, J.B.; Brazier, J.E.; Bullinger, M.; Kaasa, S.; Leplege, A.; Prieto, L.; et al. Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1988, 51, 1171–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jacobi, S.; MacLeod, R. Making sense of chronic illness: A therapeutic approach. J. Prim. Health Care 2011, 3, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schiff, B. A New Narrative for Psychology; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Martino, M.L.; Lemmo, D.; Gargiulo, A.; Barberio, D.; Abate, V.; Freda, M.F. Processing breast cancer experience in under-fifty women: Longitudinal trajectories of narrative sense making functions. J. Constr. Psychol. 2022; Advance online publication. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freda, M.F.; De Luca Picione, R.; Martino, M.L.; Lemmo, D.; Auriemma, E. The Psychological Model of Scaffolding for the Development of the Healthcare Relationship: Addressing a Contemporary Challenge of Healthcare System. In Handbook of Research on Healthcare Standards, Policies, and Reform; Comite, U., Ed.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2022; pp. 52–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Luca, P.R.; Dicé, F.; Freda, M.F. La comprensione della Diagnosi di DSD da Parte delle Madri: Uno studio Sui Processi di sensemaking attraverso una prospettiva semiotico-psicologica. Psicol. Salut. 2015, 2, 47–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dicé, F.; Auricchio, M.; Boursier, V.; De Luca Picione, R.; Santamaria, F.; Salerno, M.; Valerio, P.; Freda, M.F. Lo scaffolding psicologico per la presa in Carico delle Condizioni Intersex/DSD. I setting di Ascolto Congiunto. Psicol. Salut. 2018, 1, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | Participants (n = 31) | |
---|---|---|
Age | 57.45 (±9.23) | |
Years from Diagnosis | 13.64 (±10.17) | |
Sex | ||
Female | 12 (39%) | |
Male | 19 (61%) | |
Comorbidity with other | Yes | 20 (64.5%) |
chronic conditions | No | 11 (35.5%) |
Narrative Function | Modalities |
---|---|
Organization of temporality | Absence A1 Crystalization A2 Transformation A3 |
Integration of disease | Conflict B1 Tolerance B2 Coexistence B3 |
Expression of emotions | Vagueness C1 Differentiation C2 |
Orientation to action | Executive D1 Flexible D2 Limiting D3 |
Social sharing | Loneliness E1 Interchange E2 Sharing E3 |
Cluster 1 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Cla/Mod | Mod/Cla | p.Value | v.Test | |
A = A_3 | 100.00000 | 93.33333 | <0.001 | 5.429334 |
B = B_3 | 100.00000 | 80.00000 | <0.001 | 4.655995 |
D = D_2 | 88.88889 | 53,33333 | <0.001 | 2.770115 |
D = D_1 | 31.81818 | 46,66667 | <0.001 | −2.770115 |
B = B_2 | 17.64706 | 20.00000 | <0.001 | −3.696399 |
A = A_2 | 0.00000 | 0.00000 | <0.001 | −4.361849 |
Cluster 2 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Cla/Mod | Mod/Cla | p.Value | v.Test | |
A = A_2 | 100.00000 | 75.00 | <0.001 | 4.361849 |
B = B_2 | 82.35294 | 87.50 | <0.001 | 3.696399 |
D = D_1 | 68.18182 | 93.75 | <0.001 | 2.770115 |
D = D_2 | 11.11111 | 6.25 | <0.001 | −2.770115 |
B = B_3 | 0.00000 | 0.00 | <0.001 | −4.655995 |
A = A_3 | 0.00000 | 0.00 | <0.001 | −5.429334 |
Cluster 1 n = 15 | Cluster 2 n = 16 | p.Value | |
---|---|---|---|
PACIC—Patient activation | 3.04 (1.13) | 2.21 (0.94) | 0.034 |
PACIC—Delivery system/practice design | 3.67 (1.30) | 3.12 (1.29) | 0.254 |
PACIC—Goal setting/tailoring | 2.63 (1.07) | 2.21 (0.93) | 0.261 |
PACIC—Problem solving/contextual counselling | 2.63 (1.46) | 2.28 (1.27) | 0.480 |
PACIC—Follow-up/coordination | 2.43 (1.37) | 1.80 (0.70) | 0.128 |
PHE-S | 3.33 (0.62) | 2.75 (0.77) | 0.027 |
PCS-12 | 49 (11) | 49 (7) | 0.80 |
MCS-12 | 55 (8) | 53 (9) | 0.62 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Maiello, A.; Auriemma, E.; De Luca Picione, R.; Pacella, D.; Freda, M.F. Giving Meaning to Non-Communicable Illness: Mixed-Method Research on Sense of Grip on Disease (SoGoD). Healthcare 2022, 10, 1309. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10071309
Maiello A, Auriemma E, De Luca Picione R, Pacella D, Freda MF. Giving Meaning to Non-Communicable Illness: Mixed-Method Research on Sense of Grip on Disease (SoGoD). Healthcare. 2022; 10(7):1309. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10071309
Chicago/Turabian StyleMaiello, Assunta, Ersilia Auriemma, Raffaele De Luca Picione, Daniela Pacella, and Maria Francesca Freda. 2022. "Giving Meaning to Non-Communicable Illness: Mixed-Method Research on Sense of Grip on Disease (SoGoD)" Healthcare 10, no. 7: 1309. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10071309
APA StyleMaiello, A., Auriemma, E., De Luca Picione, R., Pacella, D., & Freda, M. F. (2022). Giving Meaning to Non-Communicable Illness: Mixed-Method Research on Sense of Grip on Disease (SoGoD). Healthcare, 10(7), 1309. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10071309