Sheri L Robb1, Joan E Haase1, Susan M Perkins2, Paul R Haut3, Amanda K Henley1, Kathleen A Knafl4, Yan Tong2. 1. Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, IN, USA. 3. Indiana University School of Medicine, Riley Hospital for Children at Indiana University Health, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 4. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Nursing, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
Objectives: To examine the feasibility/acceptability of a parent-delivered Active Music Engagement (AME + P) intervention for young children with cancer and their parents. Secondary aim to explore changes in AME + P child emotional distress (facial affect) and parent emotional distress (mood; traumatic stress symptoms) relative to controls. Methods: A pilot two-group randomized trial was conducted with parents/children (ages 3-8 years) receivingAME + P ( n = 9) or attention control ( n = 7). Feasibility of parent delivery was assessed using a delivery checklist and child engagement; acceptability through parent interviews; preliminary outcomes at baseline, postintervention, 30 days postintervention. Results: Parent delivery was feasible, as they successfully delivered AME activities, but interviews indicated parent delivery was not acceptable to parents. Emotional distress was lower for AME + P children, but parents derived no benefit. Conclusions: Despite child benefit, findings do not support parent delivery of AME + P.
RCT Entities:
Objectives: To examine the feasibility/acceptability of a parent-delivered Active Music Engagement (AME + P) intervention for young children with cancer and their parents. Secondary aim to explore changes in AME + P child emotional distress (facial affect) and parent emotional distress (mood; traumatic stress symptoms) relative to controls. Methods: A pilot two-group randomized trial was conducted with parents/children (ages 3-8 years) receiving AME + P ( n = 9) or attention control ( n = 7). Feasibility of parent delivery was assessed using a delivery checklist and child engagement; acceptability through parent interviews; preliminary outcomes at baseline, postintervention, 30 days postintervention. Results: Parent delivery was feasible, as they successfully delivered AME activities, but interviews indicated parent delivery was not acceptable to parents. Emotional distress was lower for AME + P children, but parents derived no benefit. Conclusions: Despite child benefit, findings do not support parent delivery of AME + P.
Authors: Anne E Kazak; M Catherine Cant; Merritt M Jensen; Mary McSherry; Mary T Rourke; Wei-Ting Hwang; Melissa A Alderfer; David Beele; Steven Simms; Beverly J Lange Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-09-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Germán Velez-Florez; María Camila Velez-Florez; Jose Oscar Mantilla-Rivas; Liliana Patarroyo-Rodríguez; Rodrigo Borrero-León; Santiago Rodríguez-León Journal: Curr Psychiatry Rep Date: 2018-07-21 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Kristen A Russ; Steven J Holochwost; Susan M Perkins; Kristin Stegenga; Seethal A Jacob; David Delgado; Amanda K Henley; Joan E Haase; Sheri L Robb Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2020-02-19 Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Steven J Holochwost; Sheri L Robb; Amanda K Henley; Kristin Stegenga; Susan M Perkins; Kristen A Russ; Seethal A Jacob; David Delgado; Joan E Haase; Caitlin M Krater Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2020-11-02
Authors: Román-Carlos Rodríguez-Rodríguez; Ana Noreña-Peña; Teresa Chafer-Bixquert; Alicia Lorenzo Vásquez; Javier González de Dios; Carmen Solano Ruiz Journal: Glob Health Action Date: 2022-12-31 Impact factor: 2.996