Despite the importance of both members of the adult patient–care partner dyad, a majority of research on illness management is focused on the patient or the care partner. The basic principle of the Theory of Dyadic Illness Management is that illness management is a dyadic phenomenon; the theory focuses extensively on the dyad as an interdependent team. The way dyads appraise illness as a unit influences the ways in which they engage in behaviors to manage illness together in a recursive fashion that influences dyadic health. Optimizing the health of both members of the dyad is a goal of the theory. In turn, the health of the dyad can feedback to influence how they appraise and manage illness together. Finally, dyadic illness management is an inherently variable process that is influenced by several contextual factors. Supportive evidence and implications for practice and future research are presented.

This paper reviews empirical findings concerning the decision-making process of persons with dementia and their family carers, with a particular focus on the extent and determinants of involvement of persons with dementia in the decision-making process. To be included in this review, studies needed to be published in peer-reviewed journals between 1999 and 2014, report empirical data from participants with dementia and/or their family carers, and pertain to the involvement of persons with dementia and their family carers in decisions about everyday care, medical care and treatment, or long-term care. A total of 36 studies were included. Results indicated that not all persons with dementia are excluded from participating in the decision-making process, but there is a broad spectrum of what constitutes shared decision-making in dementia. Studies concerning the determinants of shared decision-making mostly focused on non-modifiable factors. Future research is needed to better promote shared decision-making among persons with dementia and their family carers.

Most family caregiving research has relied on the perspective of the caregiver but has not systematically examined the views and opinions of the elder who is receiving care. The present study examined 63 caregiving dyads to determine how the responses of each member had an impact on the well-being of the other member of the dyad. Caregiver relationship strain predicted his or her own depression and negative health, but no significant association was found between caregiver and care recipient outcomes. Multilevel modeling was used to assess the level of dyadic discrepancy over the care recipient's needs and appraisal of caregiving difficulties. Results indicate that there is little disagreement over the care recipient's needs, but a significant amount of variation in how much the care recipient and caregiver agree on their appraisals of caregiving difficulties. Relationship strain perceived by the caregiver, but not the care recipient, was significantly associated with this disagreement.

Physical activity can confer many benefits on cancer survivors, including relief of persistent symptoms related to cancer treatment. To evaluate the effect of a motivational interviewing (MI) intervention on increasing physical activity (Community Healthy Activities Model Program for Seniors questionnaire) and improving aerobic fitness (6-minute walk), health (Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36), and fatigue (Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale) in cancer survivors. A secondary purpose was to evaluate whether the effect of MI on physical activities depended on self-efficacy. Fifty-six physically inactive adult cancer survivors (mean=42 months since completion of treatment) were assigned randomly to intervention and control groups. The MI intervention consisted of one in-person counseling session followed by two MI telephone calls over 6 months. Control group participants received two telephone calls without MI content. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, and were analyzed using multilevel modeling. The results of the MI intervention explained significant group differences in regular physical activities (measured in caloric expenditure per week), controlling for time since completion of cancer treatment (p<.05). Aerobic fitness, physical and mental health, and fatigue were not different between groups. In the intervention group, individuals with high self-efficacy for exercise at baseline increased their physical activity more than those with low self-efficacy (p<.05). In the control group, increases in physical activity did not depend on self-efficacy. Use of MI may increase physical activity in long-term cancer survivors, especially in persons with high self-efficacy for exercise. Multilevel modeling analysis revealed individual changes that would not have been shown by analysis of group means. Future studies with larger samples or more intense MI interventions may show changes in aerobic fitness, physical and mental health, and fatigue.