AUTHOR=Granata Nicolò , Nissanova Ekaterina , Torlaschi Valeria , Ferrari Marina , Vigorè Martina , Sommaruga Marinella , Angelino Elisabetta , Rizza Claudia , Caprino Alessandra , Pierobon Antonia TITLE=Psychosocial Cardiological Schedule-Revised (PCS-R) in a Cardiac Rehabilitation Unit: Reflections Upon Data Collection (2010–2017) and New Challenges JOURNAL=Frontiers in Psychology VOLUME=11 YEAR=2020 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01720 DOI=10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01720 ISSN=1664-1078 ABSTRACT=Introduction

The Psychosocial Cardiological Schedule (PCS) was developed as a screening tool for patients undergoing cardiac rehabilitation (CR) to detect clinically relevant psychosocial/cognitive problems requiring psychological assessment/intervention. Filled out by a trained nurse, it classifies patients according to their need or not for a psychological interview and intervention provided by the psychologist (PCS-Yes vs. PCS-No).

Aims

The main aim was to compare PCS data collected, respectively, in 2010 and 2017, regarding patients’ socio-demographic characteristics, clinical variables, and the inclusion criteria for psychological counseling. Subsequently, the original Italian PCS was revised and an English version of the schedule was provided [PCS-Revised (PCS-R)].

Results

28 patients (aged 53.5 + 12.6 years, M = 20) of the 87 recruited in 2010 vs. 35 (aged 64.9 + 12.7 years, M = 28) of the 83 recruited in 2017 met the criteria for PCS-Yes: age < 55 years, social problems (living alone, no social support), manifest psychological/behavioral problems, suspected neuropsychological disorders, low prescription adherence, inadequate disease awareness. Comparing the two samples (2010 vs. 2017), clinical variables were similar, and the need for a psychological interview did not differ substantially (32.2 vs. 42.2%), but age increased significantly (PCS-Yes: 53.5 ± 12.6 vs. 64.9 ± 12.7 years, p = 0.001; PCS-No: 68.3 ± 8.0 vs. 75.0 ± 7.7 years, p = 0.0001). A significant increase was observed in the recommendation for neuropsychological assessment (3.6 vs. 25.7%, p = 0.02) to confirm eventual cognitive deficits. These results, the clinical experience, and the recent evidences from literature led to the PCS-R, incorporating a psychosocial screening, a psychological/neuropsychological deeper assessment, and a recommendation for a specific intervention to be carried out either during rehabilitation or in outpatient services.

Conclusion

The data comparison highlight changes in the cardiac population, which is aging and more frequently requires neuropsychological assessment. The PCS-R could be considered in clinical practice as a useful screening tool to implement a timely coordinated interdisciplinary intervention, comprehensive of specific and tailored psychotherapeutic techniques.