F Sleeman1, E A Northam, W Crouch, F J Cameron. 1. School of Psychology, Psychiatry and Psychological Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
AIMS: Studies of siblings of children with Type 1 diabetes (Type 1 DM) have shown either increased levels of maladjustment or, alternatively, increased levels of pro-social behaviour according to whether the sibling or parent was interviewed. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychological adjustment of Type 1 DM siblings using both parent and sibling report and to assess the concordance between child and parent reports. METHODS: Ninety-nine siblings aged 11-17 years and parents of children with Type 1 DM treated at the Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne were recruited sequentially. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was used to assess well siblings' emotional and behavioural functioning using data collected within a semi-structured interview. SDQ data between the sibling cohort and normative data sample were compared using independent-samples t-tests. Sibling reports and parent reports were compared using a series of paired-sample t-tests and correlation analyses. RESULTS: Type 1 DM siblings did not report greater emotional or behavioural maladjustment or more pro-social behaviour than norms. Parents rated siblings' pro-social behaviour as being comparable with that of youth from the general community; however, parents rated healthy siblings as having lower levels of maladjustment; specifically, significantly fewer conduct problems, hyperactive behaviour and peer-related problems (all P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between parent ratings and sibling ratings on peer-related problems or pro-social behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Type 1 DM siblings did not report increased behavioural or emotional dysfunction relative to children in the general population and, according to their parents, were even better adjusted than their peers.
AIMS: Studies of siblings of children with Type 1 diabetes (Type 1 DM) have shown either increased levels of maladjustment or, alternatively, increased levels of pro-social behaviour according to whether the sibling or parent was interviewed. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychological adjustment of Type 1 DM siblings using both parent and sibling report and to assess the concordance between child and parent reports. METHODS: Ninety-nine siblings aged 11-17 years and parents of children with Type 1 DM treated at the Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne were recruited sequentially. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was used to assess well siblings' emotional and behavioural functioning using data collected within a semi-structured interview. SDQ data between the sibling cohort and normative data sample were compared using independent-samples t-tests. Sibling reports and parent reports were compared using a series of paired-sample t-tests and correlation analyses. RESULTS: Type 1 DM siblings did not report greater emotional or behavioural maladjustment or more pro-social behaviour than norms. Parents rated siblings' pro-social behaviour as being comparable with that of youth from the general community; however, parents rated healthy siblings as having lower levels of maladjustment; specifically, significantly fewer conduct problems, hyperactive behaviour and peer-related problems (all P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between parent ratings and sibling ratings on peer-related problems or pro-social behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Type 1 DM siblings did not report increased behavioural or emotional dysfunction relative to children in the general population and, according to their parents, were even better adjusted than their peers.