The beneficial effects of self-care include improved well-being and lower morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. In this article we address the current state of self-care research and propose an agenda for future research based on the inaugural conference of the International Center for Self-Care Research held in Rome, Italy in June 2019. The vision of this Center is a world where self-care is prioritized by individuals, families, and communities and is the first line of approach in every health care encounter. The mission of the Center is to lead the self-care research endeavor, improving conceptual clarity and promoting interdisciplinary work informed by a shared vision addressing knowledge gaps. A focused research agenda can deepen our theoretical understanding of self-care and the mechanisms underlying self-care, which can contribute to the development of effective interventions that improve outcomes. During conference discussions, we identified seven major reasons why self-care is challenging, which can be grouped into the general categories of behavior change and illness related factors. We identified six specific knowledge gaps that, if addressed, may help to address these challenges: the influence of habit formation on behavior change, resilience in the face of stressful life events that interfere with self-care, the influence of culture on self-care behavioral choices, the difficulty performing self-care with multiple chronic conditions, self-care in persons with severe mental illness, and the influence of others (care partners, family, peer supporters, and healthcare professionals) on self-care. To achieve the vision and mission of the Center, we will lead a collaborative program of research that addresses self-care knowledge gaps and improves outcomes, create a supportive international network for knowledge transfer and support of innovations in self-care research, and support and train others in self-care research. Beyond these specific short-term goals, important policy implications of this work are discussed.

Aim and objectives: To assess the prevalence of anxiety, sleep disorders and self‐efficacy and their predicting factors among nurses facing COVID‐19.Background: The spread of COVID‐19 throughout the world determined a series of modifications of several National Health Service organisations, with a potential series of psychological consequences among nurses, who were particularly afflicted by this situation of changes and precariousness.Design: A cross‐sectional study was carried out from February–April 2020.Methods: A total of 1,005 nurses employed in different Italian hospital wards, during the COVID‐19 pandemic, were recruited. Analyses were based on descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression. The STROBE checklist for cross‐sectional studies was used in this study.Results: The prevalence of sleep disturbances, moderate anxiety and low self‐efficacy was 71.4%, 33.23% and 50.65%, respectively. We found a positive correlation between anxiety and sleep quality (0.408; p < .0001) and negative correlations between self‐efficacy and anxiety (−0.217; p < .0001) and sleep quality and self‐efficacy (−0.134; p < .0001).The factor independently associated with all variables was gender. Females were more prone to sleep disturbances, anxiety and low levels of self‐efficacy than males (p < .05).Conclusions: The prevalence of anxiety, sleep disorders and low self‐efficacy among Italian nurses during the COVID‐19 pandemic was high. Healthcare managers should recognise and consider these results to reduce the risk of the onset of major mental problems that could result in post‐traumatic stress disorder.Relevance to clinical practice: Nurses facing major incidents as COVID‐19 pandemic are among healthcare personnel exposed to a high risk to develop psychological disturbance that should be assessed and recognised, in order to find helpful coping strategies to inform support services and avoid to hesitate in post‐traumatic stress disorders.

Self-care is a fundamental element of treatment for patients with a chronic condition and a major focus of many interventions. A large body of research exists describing different types of self-care interventions, but these studies have never been compared across conditions. Examination of heterogeneous interventions could provide insights into effective approaches that should be used in diverse patient populations. To provide a comprehensive and standardized cross-condition overview of interventions to enhance self-care in patients with a chronic condition. Specific aims were to: 1) identify what self-care concepts and behaviors are evaluated in self-care interventions; 2) classify and quantify heterogeneity in mode and type of delivery; 3) quantify the behavior change techniques used to enhance self-care behavior; and 4) assess the dose of self-care interventions delivered. Scoping review DATA SOURCES: Four electronic databases - PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO and CINAHL - were searched from January 2008 through January 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with concealed allocation to the intervention were included if they compared a behavioral or educational self- care intervention to usual care or another self-care intervention and were conducted in adults. Nine common chronic conditions were included: hypertension, coronary artery disease, arthritis, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, stroke, asthma, chronic obstructive lung disease, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diagnoses that are psychiatric (e.g. schizophrenia), acute rather than chronic, or benefitting little from self-care (e.g. dementia) were excluded. Studies had to be reported in English with full-text available. 9309 citations were considered and 233 studies were included in the final review. Most studies addressed type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 85; 36%), hypertension (n = 32; 14%) or heart failure (n = 27; 12%). The majority (97%) focused on healthy behaviors like physical activity (70%), dietary intake (59%), and medication management (52%). Major deficits found in self-care interventions included a lack of attention to the psychological consequences of chronic illness, technology and behavior change techniques were rarely used, few studies focused on helping patients manage signs and symptoms, and the interventions were rarely innovative. Research reporting was generally poor. Major gaps in targeted areas of self-care were identified. Opportunities exist to improve the quality and reporting of future self-care intervention research. Registration: The study was registered in the PROSPERO database (#123,719).

Many studies of heart failure (HF) self-care have been conducted since the last update of the situation-specific theory of HF self-care. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the manner in which characteristics of the problem, person, and environment interact to influence decisions about self-care made by adults with chronic HF. Methods: This study is a theoretical update. Literature on the influence of the problem, person, and environment on HF self-care is summarized. Results: Consistent with naturalistic decision making, the interaction of the problem, person, and environment creates a situation in which a self-care decision is needed. Problem factors influencing decisions about HF self-care include specific conditions such as cognitive impairment, diabetes mellitus, sleep disorders, depression, and symptoms. Comorbid conditions make HF self-care difficult for a variety of reasons. Person factors influencing HF self-care include age, knowledge, skill, health literacy, attitudes, perceived control, values, social norms, cultural beliefs, habits, motivation, activation, self-efficacy, and coping. Environmental factors include weather, crime, violence, access to the Internet, the built environment, social support, and public policy. Conclusions: A robust body of knowledge has accumulated on the person-related factors influencing HF self-care. More research on the contribution of problem-related factors to HF self-care is needed because very few people have only HF and no other chronic conditions. The research on environment-related factors is particularly sparse. Seven new propositions are included in this update. We strongly encourage investigators to consider the interactions of problem, person, and environmental factors affecting self-care decisions in future studies.