A A Hains1, W H Davies2, E Parton3, J Totka4, J Amoroso-Camarata4. 1. The Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (Dr Hains) 2. The Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (Dr Davies) 3. The Department of Pediatrics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee (Ms Parton) 4. The Children's Hospital of Wisconsin, Milwaukee (Mss Totka and Amoroso Camarata)
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to examine the effectiveness of a stress management training program in helping adolescents with diabetes cope with stress. METHODS:Youths who displayed evidence of metabolic control problems received training in the use of both cognitive-restructuring and problem-solving strategies. Treatment impact was assessed on measures of coping, anxiety level, diabetes-specific stress, and metabolic control. RESULTS: Analyses of covariance showed no differences between the training group and a control group at posttest and follow-up. However, the small sample size and within-group variability may have precluded finding significant results. Therefore, within-group comparisons were conducted, and improvements were found in the training group on pretest to posttest and pretest to follow-up comparisons for anxiety, stress, and coping measures. No differences were found in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the intervention had some positive impact, although this interpretation must be considered preliminary. Future research should replicate this study and explore the applicability and effectiveness of this intervention in specific populations.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to examine the effectiveness of a stress management training program in helping adolescents with diabetes cope with stress. METHODS: Youths who displayed evidence of metabolic control problems received training in the use of both cognitive-restructuring and problem-solving strategies. Treatment impact was assessed on measures of coping, anxiety level, diabetes-specific stress, and metabolic control. RESULTS: Analyses of covariance showed no differences between the training group and a control group at posttest and follow-up. However, the small sample size and within-group variability may have precluded finding significant results. Therefore, within-group comparisons were conducted, and improvements were found in the training group on pretest to posttest and pretest to follow-up comparisons for anxiety, stress, and coping measures. No differences were found in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the intervention had some positive impact, although this interpretation must be considered preliminary. Future research should replicate this study and explore the applicability and effectiveness of this intervention in specific populations.
Authors: Michael Seid; Elizabeth J D'Amico; James W Varni; Jennifer K Munafo; Maria T Britto; Carolyn M Kercsmar; Dennis Drotar; Eileen C King; Lynn Darbie Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2011-12-13
Authors: Elizabeth J Mayer-Davis; David M Maahs; Michael Seid; Jamie Crandell; Franziska K Bishop; Kimberly A Driscoll; Christine M Hunter; Jessica C Kichler; Debra Standiford; Joan M Thomas Journal: Lancet Child Adolesc Health Date: 2018-07-30
Authors: Shelagh A Mulvaney; Korey K Hood; David G Schlundt; Chandra Y Osborn; Kevin B Johnson; Russell L Rothman; Kenneth A Wallston Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2011-07-07 Impact factor: 5.602
Authors: Hiran Thabrew; Karolina Stasiak; Sarah E Hetrick; Liesje Donkin; Jessica H Huss; April Highlander; Stephen Wong; Sally N Merry Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-12-22