Claire E Wakefield1,2, Ursula M Sansom-Daly3,4,5, Brittany C McGill3,4, Sarah J Ellis3,4, Emma L Doolan3,4, Eden G Robertson3,4, Sanaa Mathur3,4, Richard J Cohn3,4. 1. Kids Cancer Centre (KCC), Level 1, Sydney Children's Hospital, High Street, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia. c.wakefield@unsw.edu.au. 2. Discipline of Paediatrics, School of Women's and Children's Health, UNSW Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. c.wakefield@unsw.edu.au. 3. Kids Cancer Centre (KCC), Level 1, Sydney Children's Hospital, High Street, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia. 4. Discipline of Paediatrics, School of Women's and Children's Health, UNSW Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. 5. Sydney Youth Cancer Service, Prince of Wales/Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of "Cascade": an online, group-based, cognitive behavioral therapy intervention, delivered "live" by a psychologist, to assist parents of children who have completed cancer treatment. METHODS:Forty-seven parents were randomized to Cascade (n = 25) or a 6-month waitlist (n = 22). Parents completed questionnaires at baseline, 1-2 weeks and 6 months post-intervention. Thirty parents completed full evaluations of the Cascade program (n = 21 randomized to Cascade, n = 9 completed Cascade post-waitlist). RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of Cascade participants completed the intervention (n = 24/25). Eighty percent of parents completed every questionnaire (mean completion time 25 min (SD = 12)). Cascade was described as at least "somewhat" helpful by all parents. None rated Cascade as "very/quite" burdensome. Parents reported that the "online format was easy to use" (n = 28, 93.3 %), "I learnt new skills" (n = 28, 93.3 %), and "I enjoyed talking to others" (n = 29, 96.7 %). Peer-to-peer benefits were highlighted by good group cohesion scores. CONCLUSIONS:Cascade is highly acceptable and feasible. Its online delivery mechanism may address inequities in post-treatment support for parents, a particularly acute concern for rural/remote families. Future research needs to establish the efficacy of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12613000270718, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12613000270718.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of "Cascade": an online, group-based, cognitive behavioral therapy intervention, delivered "live" by a psychologist, to assist parents of children who have completed cancer treatment. METHODS: Forty-seven parents were randomized to Cascade (n = 25) or a 6-month waitlist (n = 22). Parents completed questionnaires at baseline, 1-2 weeks and 6 months post-intervention. Thirty parents completed full evaluations of the Cascade program (n = 21 randomized to Cascade, n = 9 completed Cascade post-waitlist). RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of Cascade participants completed the intervention (n = 24/25). Eighty percent of parents completed every questionnaire (mean completion time 25 min (SD = 12)). Cascade was described as at least "somewhat" helpful by all parents. None rated Cascade as "very/quite" burdensome. Parents reported that the "online format was easy to use" (n = 28, 93.3 %), "I learnt new skills" (n = 28, 93.3 %), and "I enjoyed talking to others" (n = 29, 96.7 %). Peer-to-peer benefits were highlighted by good group cohesion scores. CONCLUSIONS: Cascade is highly acceptable and feasible. Its online delivery mechanism may address inequities in post-treatment support for parents, a particularly acute concern for rural/remote families. Future research needs to establish the efficacy of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12613000270718, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12613000270718.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer and oncology; Computer applications/eHealth; Coping skills and adjustment; Parents
Authors: Yan Leykin; Seema M Thekdi; Dianne M Shumay; Ricardo F Muñoz; Michelle Riba; Laura B Dunn Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Peter C Trask; Amber G Paterson; Christine L Trask; Cristina B Bares; JoAnn Birt; Cathy Maan Journal: J Pediatr Oncol Nurs Date: 2003 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.636
Authors: Emily S Tonorezos; Dana Barnea; Richard J Cohn; Monica S Cypriano; Brice C Fresneau; Riccardo Haupt; Lars Hjorth; Yasushi Ishida; Jarmila Kruseova; Claudia E Kuehni; Purna A Kurkure; Thorsten Langer; Paul C Nathan; Jane E Skeen; Roderick Skinner; Nurdan Tacyildiz; Marry M van den Heuvel-Eibrink; Jeanette F Winther; Melissa M Hudson; Kevin C Oeffinger Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Emily S Tonorezos; Richard J Cohn; Adam W Glaser; Jeremy Lewin; Eileen Poon; Claire E Wakefield; Kevin C Oeffinger Journal: Lancet Date: 2022-04-16 Impact factor: 202.731
Authors: Helen Slater; Jared M Campbell; Jennifer N Stinson; Megan M Burley; Andrew M Briggs Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-12-12 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Anna Wikman; Laura Kukkola; Helene Börjesson; Martin Cernvall; Joanne Woodford; Helena Grönqvist; Louise von Essen Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Frank Muscara; Maria C McCarthy; Meredith Rayner; Jan M Nicholson; Anica Dimovski; Laura McMillan; Stephen J C Hearps; Jackie Yamada; Kylie Burke; Robyn Walser; Vicki A Anderson Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-07-01